tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333Wed, 21 Feb 2018 16:39:54 +0000First Time UnemployedContinuing UnemploymentFTUFull-time EmployeesPart-Time EmployeesUnemployedEmployment SituationSeasonal NumbersSeasonal FactorsWorkforce ParticipationFederal DebtLying with StatisticsExisting Home SalesCESNew Home ConstructionWeek in ReviewNew Home SalesCPS#JobsReportMonthly Jobs ReportCPIFederal BudgetPredictionDeficitObamacareEconomyMARTSUnemploymentMedicareNon-seasonally adjustedJobsCurrent Employment StatisticsGDPUnemployment RateCompletionsUnder ConstructionStartsInflationReal EstateCurrent Population SurveyFACTsJOLTS#RealEstateRetail SalesFACTObamaTaxParticipation RateAdvance RetailImmigrationMultiple Job HoldersACAMedicaidAnnualized GDPMJHReal GDPSocial SecurityWorkforce PopulationAverage Sales PriceFTU StreakMonth in reviewRSEUHousingManufacturing#ActOnJobs#RedGrayBlueADPDeflationEmploymentHousing RecessionWar on WomenAutomobile SalesElectronics and AppliancesGasolineJobs RecessionTotal units SoldIllegal ImmigrantsPolitics#Waron(Wo)MenCaliforniaDebtFour PresidentsRecoveryBLSRevised dataTreasury DepartmentHiringMAEUSeparationsEffective Unemployment RateFoodHealth CareHurricane EconomicsMinimum WagePennsylvaniaPolicyPrivate Sector JobsConstructionFive PresidentsObamaRecessionTexasWorkforce InversionBushClothingGross Domestic ProductHealth and Human ServicesObamanomicsShelterTop TenWorkforce ParticipantsCBOEnergyFurniturePart-time JobsPart-time RecoveryQuantitative Easing#MARTSADP ForecastCornerstoneGeorgiaIllinoisMining and LoggingNew YorkParticipationReaganReal Estate ForecastSOTUSurplusTaxesUnemployment VirginsClintonDual Part-time JobsEducationFull-time JobsGeneral MerchandiseHome OwnershipHousing InventoryInfrastructureMedical InflationNew Home InventoryOhioSequesterShadow AccountTARP#ActOnIllegalImmigrantsCensusExecutive OrdersGOP DebateGovernment JobsInsured UnemploymentInternetJane JacobsJobs Forecast ArticleJobs Report ForecastMetropolitanMichiganNational DefenseSpendingState of the UnionTweet#SchumerShutdownCHIPConsumer Price IndexDollar VolumeDual Full-time JobsElectionFull ParticipationGDIGPDIGasoline StimulusInformationInformation EconomyMarriageMarried FamiliesNew Construction ForecastNorth CarolinaOIl and GasPCEPermitsRevenueSouthUnadjustedUndocumented ResidentsWashington StateWisconsin#1A#2A#MJH#OpportunityForAll#unemploymentAOTAAdjustedBuilding MaterialCommodity DeflationCorporate TaxesDays on MarketDebt ClockFederal Income TaxesFinancial ActivitiesFirst AmendmentFloridaForecastHHSHiresJob CreationJob OpeningsJobs ReportLight Truck SalesLongitude EffectMedian Sales PriceMidwestMisery IndexMortgagesNNMINew JerseyNortheastPolice OfficersProjectionsReligionRevisionsShelter InflationStreakStudent LoansTwitterU-3U-6Unauthorized ImmigrantsWest#BundyRanch#CPI#Deflation#ItsTheEconomy#WhatWouldBillDo#illegalimmigration2016A Few Good MenAging WorkforceAlaskaAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment ActBLMClean EnergyConsumer SpendingContractionCovered InsuredDACADebateDeductiblesDonald TrumpEmployedEstablishment DataExecutive ActionExisting Home Sales ForecastExpansionFashionista IndexFergusonFinal RetailFiringFood and Beverage StoresFreedomGRPGoldilocks EconomyGovernment SpendingHealth InsuranceHealthcareHomeland SecurityHomes for SaleISISIncomplete RecoveryIndividual TaxesInnovation HubsInterestInterest on the DebtIowaJobs PlanLayoffsMREUMassachusettsMedical Care CostsMedicineNevadaNew Home Sales ForecastNon-Store RetailNuclear EnergyObama CurveObamacare ObamataxObamacracyOutlaysPay EquityPersonal Health Care CostsPolticsPre-RecessionPreliminary RetailPremiumsPuerto RicoRFID braceletsRGBRegional State Employment UnemploymentRetail Sales ForecastReverse MortgageRomneycareSales PriceSecond AmendmentTax CreditsTeenagersTruck SalesTrustee ReportUnderemploymentVegetarianVeterans AdministrationWhite Housealgal blooms#5A#ACA#EmptyGlassCity#FaithUnderFire#RedRiverRumble#RidiculousPoliticalCorrectness#WakeUpAmerica#WorkerGrowth#humor#toledo #waterCrisis20142A5013c911 CrossA-14A-16ARRAAdvertisingAffordable Care ActAl qaedaAlabamaAllergiesAlternative LifestyleAmendmentAnnualAnnual GDPAnnualized Sales.Anti-stimulusApoloArkansasAssemblyAtheismAttorney GeneralAustriaAutomobile ProductionBEDSBible. SyriaBill of RightsBiofuelBorder CrisisBuffet TaxCDCCNBCCPI-UCancerCapital Gains TaxChallengerCheeseburger IndexChristmasChrristianityCinco de MayoCivilian Labor ForceClean Energy InitiativeClimateCoalColoradoColumbiaCongressConnecticutConservative UncleConservatives.ConstitutionContinuing UnemploPredictionCough and Cold IndexDOHADOMADREAMDairyDavid WiseDecemberDeletegateDemandDisaster Unemployment ProgramDisplaced WorkersDividendsDriver's LicensesDrunk DrivingDurable GoodsEarningsElectricityElementary SchoolEmployer MandateEnergy InflationEntitlementsEnvironmentExpendituresExportsFICAFREDFaithFake NewsFamiliesFifth AmendmentFlagFood Services and Drinking PlacesFood recallsForeign PolicyGDP ForecastGHGGroceriesGross Private Domestic InvestmentGrowth PeriodGruberHageHealthHendersonHigh SchoolHobbyHomes SoldHousehold formationHousing ParadoxIURIncome InequalityInmatesInterest TaxInternational StandardsInversionJanuaryJob AbsorptionJobs StreakJobs.KansasKelpKeystoneLand Use LawLaw LicenseLawsuitLouisianaMCTRMH370MJH ForecastMarijuanaMarylandMathMeatMental IllnessMicrosoftMid-term ElectionMiddle SchoolMinnesotaMontanaMulti-family housingNAiVENational Export InitiativeNational StandardsNew MexicoNon-FamiliesNon-Farm JobsNon-durable GoodsObama ParadoxOlympicsOregonOvertime EmployeesPLanningPOTUSPersonal Consumption ExpendituresPersonal taxesPhillips CurvePhillips Curve -PinocchioPizzaPizza IndexPre-schoolPrescriptionsProfitsQuarterlyReadingReal Estate #JobsReportReceiptsRegional PlanningRentRepublicanRestaurant RecessionRetail Ice AgeRetail RecessionSCOTUSSSDISavingsScienceSenateService EconomyShutdownSimpson-BowlesSlowdownSnowdenSolarSoldsSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaSpeechState DepartmentState Income TaxesStatisticsStealth RecessionStimulusStudySubsidiesSupplySyriaTPPTakingsTerm LimitsTerrorismTitanium DioxideTotal Dollar VolumeTrackingTroubled Assets Relief ProgramTrumpUS PopulationUninsuredUtahVAVoting RightsWagesWashington D.C.Water RightsWest VirginiaWindWithholdingWorker DisplacementWorkforce UtilizationYear in ReviewYour Republican Uncleal Factorsalgaecidesdrinking waterploiticstax exemptReclaiming Common Sensehttp://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)Blogger1401125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-7327901806924612638Wed, 21 Feb 2018 16:39:00 +00002018-02-21T08:39:54.093-08:00#RealEstateExisting Home SalesJan. Existing Homes Sales: Inventory and Price MatterThe real estate market is in a symbiotic relationship with the rest of the economy.&nbsp; If the real estate market is strong then retail sales tend to be stronger, service jobs increase, sales improve, and then the housing market improves. The "Great Recession" was actually three recessions in one: A Real Estate recession, a Jobs Recession, and a Retail Recession. Retail sales have been strengthening since the recession, with <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/december-retail-sales-2017.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>2017 being the best year ever</strong></a> and January 2018 being the <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/best-january-retail-sales-month-ever.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>best January retail month ever</strong></a>. Last month the December Existing Homes sales data recorded . <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/remarkable-december-existing-home-sales-.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The end of the year sales were higher than 2007 through 2016</strong></a>. The problem is that he end of the year inventory was lower than 1999 through 2016. Worded a different way, we ended the year with a housing inventory shortage. This shortage is causing prices to rise as demand increases. <br /><br />Last week this column produced a <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-real-estate-forecast--up-again.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January real estate forecast article</strong></a>. It was thought that we could see units sold break through the 325,000 units level and yet that it may be a struggle to break through 315,000 units due to a lack of inventory. It was thought that they inventory level should improve from December's record low level. It was also proposed that there may be one more month of declining inventory because January tends to be the month with lowest inventory for the entire year. It was also projected that we could see another record average sales price for the month of January, even if there was a decline in the average sales price from December to January.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JoznsMpx8uk/Wo2gWcsv3iI/AAAAAAAATCU/2vL5jNKasJMEWMR5ETet4Sedesyb_NQWQCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BRecord%2BLow%2BInventory%2B20180221.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JoznsMpx8uk/Wo2gWcsv3iI/AAAAAAAATCU/2vL5jNKasJMEWMR5ETet4Sedesyb_NQWQCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BRecord%2BLow%2BInventory%2B20180221.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>January Inventory Lowest Since 1999 - Better than Last Month.</strong> Last month we had fewer than 1.5 million units available for the first time since January 1999. It was the lowest monthly inventory level "ever." This month that value bounced up to 1.520 million units. This is still the lowest "ever" January level of inventory.&nbsp; We have seen declining peaks of inventory since the Summer of 2014. This means that if you are looking to purchase a home this Summer that there may be fewer homes available from which to select. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9Gb16DVQCnE/Wo2gWDUFzbI/AAAAAAAATCM/fwkGnr5UpFEI-EmQQMfOv2tX9afUjBR9gCEwYBhgL/s1600/January%2BRecord%2BASP%2B20180221.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9Gb16DVQCnE/Wo2gWDUFzbI/AAAAAAAATCM/fwkGnr5UpFEI-EmQQMfOv2tX9afUjBR9gCEwYBhgL/s640/January%2BRecord%2BASP%2B20180221.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>The Headline Units Sold was down from January 2017 - Still Better than January 2008 through 2016.</strong> The question is whether or not the glass is half empty or half full? <a href="https://www.nar.realtor/sites/default/files/documents/ehs-01-2018-overview-2018-02-21.pdf" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>If you look at the data</strong></a> from an annual basis then the glass is half empty. If you look at the units sold from 1999, 2000, and 2001, as well as the data between January 2008 and 2016 then the sales are normalizing and this is pretty good data. Remember that the forecast article was thinking that 315,000 was a probable number, that 325,000 was possible, and that it would "all" depend on inventory levels. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ndSh94Aiv6c/Wo2gWTvgmQI/AAAAAAAATCQ/HNPWpxI4jeM0FljuQvLXXDpnoh5Jz_OSwCEwYBhgL/s1600/RY%2BExisting%2BSAles%2B20180221.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ndSh94Aiv6c/Wo2gWTvgmQI/AAAAAAAATCQ/HNPWpxI4jeM0FljuQvLXXDpnoh5Jz_OSwCEwYBhgL/s640/RY%2BExisting%2BSAles%2B20180221.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>The Rolling Year Data is up from 5.469 million to 5.505 million from January 2017.</strong> This data is better than here we were during 2002 when we started the year with 5.38 million units. It is also better than January 2008 through January 2017. The good news is that we could see this number tick higher during this year as more people are working full-time jobs.&nbsp; The "bad" news is that if we only grow at 1% then we would sell 5.566 million units . This would be comparable to 2002, yet still slower than 2002 through 2006. As the monthly data is released, especially after March, April, May, and June, we will have enough data points to see how 2018 is doing compared to prior years. <br /><br />This is a national snapshot of where we were during January. All real estate is local. Contact a Realtor who is knowledgeable regarding your community, your neighborhood, your condominium. Sales prices depend on inventory, condition, location, and the motivation of buyers and sellers. People who "have to buy" may pay more for a home than the average buyer. People who "have to sell" their home may sell for less than fair market value.&nbsp; This data bodes well for the Summer. The data also indicates that it may be some time before we have a "normal level of inventory."<br /><br />It's the economy. http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/jan-existing-homes-sales-inventory-and.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-6238133281486521694Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:16:00 +00002018-02-17T06:16:36.431-08:00#MARTSAdvance RetailCPIDeflationFederal BudgetFirst Time UnemployedInflationMedical InflationNew Home ConstructionRetail Sales ForecastShelter InflationSurplusWeek in ReviewFeb. 17 Week in Review: Crickets times fiveThis week was a tragic week in Parkland, Florida. There was a Valentine's Data Massacre at a High School where, it appears, that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had information in the shooters intention to shoot students six weeks prior to the massacre. This information was apparently not forwarded to the local authorities or the Miami FBI field office. This week we also received information that the Mueller Investigation levied charges against 13 Russian nationals for interfering with the 2016 Presidential election for activities dating from 2014 through the run-up to the inauguration. Remember that President Trump did not announce his candidacy until <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apjNfkysjbM" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>June 16, 2015.</b></a>&nbsp; Both stories deserve headline status. So did the remarkable Consumer Price Index data regarding inflation, the monthly Retail Sales Survey data, the weekly unemployment claims data, and the January New Construction data. There were five pieces of good news this week a tragic piece of news and some Fake News. Which received more attention?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GnUX-hTSSTM/Wog24jd04xI/AAAAAAAATBg/XLfWNguER5wjBph1T9d3XZx-5LEgGYAmgCLcBGAs/s1600/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GnUX-hTSSTM/Wog24jd04xI/AAAAAAAATBg/XLfWNguER5wjBph1T9d3XZx-5LEgGYAmgCLcBGAs/s320/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><b>(Feb. 12)</b>&nbsp; This column finds inspiration from Internet memes, comments made by on-air personalities, and from economic data. The media has been pining for wage inflation - they got it - the are now concerned about wages rising. The were concerned over anemic inflation - they got inflation close to 2% - the supposed Federal Reserve Target Rate - now that we have some inflation they blame it for the massive stock market correct that we saw during the past month. The article "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/inflation-is-okay.html" target="_blank"><b>Inflation is Okay</b></a>" explains the "Phillips Curve" and how we have had low inflation, inflation even at 3% or 4%, and low unemployment. It also details how the "effective unemployment" rate may be depressing inflation. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hbKgK6W4MzQ/Wog3UodE2VI/AAAAAAAATBk/Abza6W_AY1AfHya8Jiidh0MkKmKhLWw6wCLcBGAs/s1600/Scatter%2BEconomy%2B20180212.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hbKgK6W4MzQ/Wog3UodE2VI/AAAAAAAATBk/Abza6W_AY1AfHya8Jiidh0MkKmKhLWw6wCLcBGAs/s640/Scatter%2BEconomy%2B20180212.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>(Feb. 13)</b>&nbsp; Some of the most read articles on this website are the forecast articles. "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/a-potentially-jolly-january-retail.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>A Potentially Jolly January Retail Report</b></a>" examined the data and the trends month to month an year to year to project a possible 5% growth rate in the January data from January 2017.<br /><br /><b>(Feb. 14)</b> there was a media-wide obsession with the Schumer Shutdown. This week the Treasury released the monthly financial statement for the government that <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-budget-surplus.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>reported a surplus</b></a>. Crickets. There is "media-wide" concern regarding entitlement spending. The media lumps self-funding Medicare and Medicaid as well as self-funding Social Security as entitlements in with "welfare."<br /><br /><b>(Feb. 14) </b>The "experts" were expecting inflation to be reported at 1.9% for January. The official number came in at 2.1%. Oh, no, that is 10% higher than expected. No it's not. It's 0.2% higher than "expected" by "experts."&nbsp; We are still seeing commodity deflation and service inflation. <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-inflation-is-lower-than-last.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>January 2018 inflation was lower than January 2017</b></a>. Crickets times two.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IjAcl0UWAk4/Wog3tcGozMI/AAAAAAAATBs/y0G-C33d_L4k6La7xakJ_nX7rA2H3xvIQCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BMARTS%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IjAcl0UWAk4/Wog3tcGozMI/AAAAAAAATBs/y0G-C33d_L4k6La7xakJ_nX7rA2H3xvIQCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BMARTS%2B20180214.png" width="640" /></a></div><b>(Feb. 14)</b> The powers that be in the government like to rely on seasonally adjusted data to smooth out the normal peaks and troughs with regard to jobs creation, job loss, increases in unemployment, drops in unemployment, and, yes increases in retail spending, also known as Christmas spending, and troughs. We recorded our "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/best-january-retail-sales-month-ever.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Best January Retail Sales Month Ever</b></a>." That is not what was reported elsewhere.&nbsp; Crickets time three.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fbZfpmdnCkw/Wog32Fz_7gI/AAAAAAAATB0/25_glhHPcz4Lv8DgZ5-aFK4Nxomsb-YnwCLcBGAs/s1600/LOWEST%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BSecoind%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFebruary%2BEVER%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fbZfpmdnCkw/Wog32Fz_7gI/AAAAAAAATB0/25_glhHPcz4Lv8DgZ5-aFK4Nxomsb-YnwCLcBGAs/s640/LOWEST%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BSecoind%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFebruary%2BEVER%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><b>(Feb. 15) </b>There are still people who are receiving unemployment benefits. The government still produces a weekly unemployment claims report.&nbsp; We saw "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/remarkable-weekly-unemployment-claims.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Remarkable Weekly Unemployment Claims</b></a>" recorded, non-seasonally adjusted, again. We saw slightly interesting seasonally adjusted&nbsp; first-time unemployment claims ignored, again. Crickets time four.<br /><br /><b>(Feb. 15)</b> The third forecast article this week was published Thursday in advance of the Friday New Construction Report. "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-real-estate-forecast-up-again.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>January Real Estate Forecast: Up Again</b></a>" commented on the upcoming New Construction Report, the soon to be released New Home Sales Report, and the potential sales and units data for the Existing Home Sales Report that will be released next week. It was anticipated that we would see higher Starts, Under Construction, and Completions data this January than were reported last January. It was also projected that we would see higher average sales prices for new and existing homes. The question was whether or not inventory shortages would impede the number of units sold.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-o8Hykmq-mWc/Wog4ADpUGMI/AAAAAAAATB4/UkiUulkgCQoYt1uC5HhE6n4fBiJPdpPHgCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BStarts%2Bnearly%2B60k%2B20180216.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-o8Hykmq-mWc/Wog4ADpUGMI/AAAAAAAATB4/UkiUulkgCQoYt1uC5HhE6n4fBiJPdpPHgCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BStarts%2Bnearly%2B60k%2B20180216.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>(Feb. 16)</b> The January New Construction Report was solid. "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-new-construction-building.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>January New Construction: Building Momentum</b></a>" detailed how Starts, units Under Construction, and Completions were all up as compared with January 2017. Crickets times five.<br /><br />Let me be crystal clear. The Parkland murders were worthy of press coverage. <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/16/parkland-shooting-victims-include-young-students-coach-who-saved-others-in-florida-high-school.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>The taking of 17 lives&nbsp; is tragic</b></a>. It is a painful lesson from which we must learn. <br /><ul><li>Alyssa Alhadeff, 14</li><li>Scott Beigel, 35</li><li>Martin Duque, 14</li><li>Nicholas Dworet, 17</li><li>Aaron Feis, 37</li><li>Jaime Guttenberg&nbsp;</li><li>Chris Hixon, 49</li><li>Luke Hoyer, 15</li><li>Cara Loughran</li><li>Gina Montalto, 14</li><li>Joaquin Oliver</li><li>Alaina Petty, 14</li><li>Meadow Pollack, 18</li><li>Helena Ramsey, 17</li><li>Alex Schachter, 14</li><li>Carmen Schentrup, 16</li><li>Peter Wang, 15</li></ul>The Russian Meddling in the election is interesting. Who meddled more Russia, the mainstream media or Hollywood?&nbsp; Were they attempting to sway the election with the creation of the television shows "Veep," "Designated Survivor," or "Madame Secretary. Were they trying to sway the election with pedantic questions leaked to Democrat candidates and gotcha questions fired at Republican candidate? Celebrities posing with the head of Donald Trump, shooting a gun at a President Trump look-a-like, or talking about blowing up the White House had no influence on the election or post-election period.... Right....<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/feb-17-week-in-review-crickets-times.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-1234203016588749225Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:16:00 +00002018-02-16T08:19:07.397-08:00#RealEstateCompletionsStartsUnder ConstructionJanuary New Construction: Building Momentum<br />The "Great Recession" was three or four recessions in one. There was the Jobs Recession, the Retail Recession, and the Housing Recession. The Housing Recession could be broken down into the New Home Recession and the Existing Home Recession. These recessions led to a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Recession. The new home construction data recorded fewer Starts, units Under Construction, and Completions during 2009 than were recorded between 1975 and 2009. New homes cannot be sold unless they are constructed. New home sales often free up some existing home inventory. New home sales also increase job prospects and retail sales. Yesterday this column produced an article titled "<b><a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-real-estate-forecast--up-again.html" target="_blank">January Real Estate Forecast: Up Again</a>.</b>" New home Starts were projected to increase over the January 2017 level. The same projections were made for units Under Construction and Completions.&nbsp; Here is what was recorded, non-seasonally adjusted. It may not be the same as what was reported, seasonally adjusted, elsewhere. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i2pvK7GpmcI/WocDb3o7rlI/AAAAAAAATA8/ETImx7SRphYwODi1Boh3F4SmtkMXS1QpACLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BStarts%2Bnearly%2B60k%2B20180216.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i2pvK7GpmcI/WocDb3o7rlI/AAAAAAAATA8/ETImx7SRphYwODi1Boh3F4SmtkMXS1QpACLcBGAs/s640/January%2BStarts%2Bnearly%2B60k%2B20180216.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>New Home Starts Broke through the 55,000 level, approached 60,000 units.&nbsp;</b> The starts data was looking good. It was thought that we should see Starts exceed 55,000 single family units and could exceed 60,000 units. We had over 58,000 starts during the month of January between 1992 and 2007. We are finally returning to a normal construction market.&nbsp; There are other ways to examine the data. This column uses the current year metric, once we get at least three months into the year, and the rolling year data. The current year data looks ahead while the rolling year data looks behind the current month. Last year the rolling year data was at 784,000 units. This year it is 854,000 units. This is a 8.9% increase in starts. This is very good. The jump from January to January was 9.3%. Can we expect nearly 9% increases in starts during the remainder of the year? Yes. Will we see this kind of growth during the remainder of the year? Time will tell.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cCMPJBVY4eI/WocDb_Z0NdI/AAAAAAAATA4/E2tEL3cDDH8Y2k918jHV1B_K_TqwWZeiACLcBGAs/s1600/RY%2BStarts%2B20180216.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-cCMPJBVY4eI/WocDb_Z0NdI/AAAAAAAATA4/E2tEL3cDDH8Y2k918jHV1B_K_TqwWZeiACLcBGAs/s640/RY%2BStarts%2B20180216.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>New Units Under Construction Better than 2008-2017. Better than most years. </b>The new construction data has been searching for a 1.2 million units month. We eclipsed the 1.0 million level during 2016. This January we are looking at nearly 1.1 million units.&nbsp; The increase in units under construction is only 4.48%. The Starts data will soon start feeding into the Under Construction data and we should see this number pop within the next few months, especially as the weather improves. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-92STGykVWig/WocDohhsuxI/AAAAAAAATBA/pDXE232-9TcNd7pjD2nTetw85NWbOmKNACLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BUC%2BUp%2Band%2BUp%2B20180216.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-92STGykVWig/WocDohhsuxI/AAAAAAAATBA/pDXE232-9TcNd7pjD2nTetw85NWbOmKNACLcBGAs/s640/January%2BUC%2BUp%2Band%2BUp%2B20180216.png" width="640" /></a></div><b></b><br /><b>Completions hammered through 75,000, nearly nailed 80,000 units.</b> We have seen better completions data during recent months as builders and buyers attempted to close deal by the end of the calendar year. This level is still excellent by recent standards. This level of completions is comparable to January 1993. Completions were up 6.55% from January 2017.&nbsp; The rolling year completions are up just over 9.0% compared to last January. Having starts and completions both up by 9% is a good thing.&nbsp; The question is whether or not next week we will see the housing inventory tick higher by a comparable amount?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ApAyURY02Yw/WocDu9bKpoI/AAAAAAAATBE/eYOwG8N3eJs7l5S3UhV8CsSDt25Q1B4DwCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BCompletions%2BNearly%2B80k%2B20180216.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ApAyURY02Yw/WocDu9bKpoI/AAAAAAAATBE/eYOwG8N3eJs7l5S3UhV8CsSDt25Q1B4DwCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BCompletions%2BNearly%2B80k%2B20180216.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />The new construction data is only part of the real estate picture. This column will be producing articles regarding the new home sales data and the existing home sales data. Home sales, new and existing, have been held back by a lack of inventory.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8pj0ixsBMsE/WocD2l7cUwI/AAAAAAAATBI/IzUFBTSICUsvIvBNvhJTYRERb-9ehOo9QCLcBGAs/s1600/RY%2BCompletions%2B20180216.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8pj0ixsBMsE/WocD2l7cUwI/AAAAAAAATBI/IzUFBTSICUsvIvBNvhJTYRERb-9ehOo9QCLcBGAs/s640/RY%2BCompletions%2B20180216.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />The new construction data was remarkable. The trend is higher than last year and a potential return to normalcy. Stay tuned for the sales data next week.<br /><br />It's the economy. http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-new-construction-building.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-5004278795568652974Thu, 15 Feb 2018 18:32:00 +00002018-02-15T10:32:41.959-08:00#RealEstateExisting Home Sales ForecastNew Construction ForecastNew Home Sales ForecastJanuary Real Estate Forecast: Up Again<br />The most reported report of any month is normally the Jobs Report. there is "always" a panel of people examining the report. Jobs are important to the economy. A similarly important report is actually a series of reports: The Real Estate Report. The first data points released will be released tomorrow with the New Construction data. The second part of this report is the existing home sales data.The existing home sales data will be released February 21st with the New Home Sales data following February 26th. Recently we have seen the number of units under construction return to nearly pre-recession levels. The Starts and completions data are still sluggish by historic standards, although they are the best that we have seen since 2007 or 2008, depending on the month. New home sales and existing home sales have been experiencing inventory shortages and record, or near record, average sales price levels.What should we expect for the January data? Expect the unexpected.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b52a_H44haU/WoXOrqIXQII/AAAAAAAAS_w/d48TrWeFHkEhSqLKHJa0_Um6AIcWmNywACLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BStarts%2BPre-report%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b52a_H44haU/WoXOrqIXQII/AAAAAAAAS_w/d48TrWeFHkEhSqLKHJa0_Um6AIcWmNywACLcBGAs/s640/January%2BStarts%2BPre-report%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Expect the Starts Data to exceed January 2017 Levels.</strong> The starts data has been gradually climbing for the month of January since 2011. The bottom of the starts valley was during 2009, a level that was even lower than January 1983.&nbsp; While the starts level could drop December to January, January is normally a stronger month than December because things have to get "started" so that they can be completed before the end of the Summer.Expect a number over 55,000 units and less than 60,000 units. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4YJf8gpHESo/WoXOzRmiH8I/AAAAAAAAS_0/Em3gUOv2oWw66T8rVUWGlKAtbj_MEr1WgCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BPre-report%2BUC%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4YJf8gpHESo/WoXOzRmiH8I/AAAAAAAAS_0/Em3gUOv2oWw66T8rVUWGlKAtbj_MEr1WgCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BPre-report%2BUC%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Expect the Under Construction data to pop higher.</strong> It has been speculated for months that we could see a value of 1.2 million units under construction. We would need to see starts to pick up and completions to slow down for this to happen, or a combination of the two. A number greater than 1.1 million is expected for this month, possibly reaching 1.13 million or 1.15 million units, non-seasonally adjusted.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oRcr8WVBrjQ/WoXO64xB32I/AAAAAAAAS_4/m2pSLU8Wnh4rjueW_nCLMf0C_i-OyupKwCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BPre-Report%2BCompletions%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oRcr8WVBrjQ/WoXO64xB32I/AAAAAAAAS_4/m2pSLU8Wnh4rjueW_nCLMf0C_i-OyupKwCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BPre-Report%2BCompletions%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Expect the Completions data to be lower than December and Higher than January 2017.</strong> The starts curve, under construction curve, and completions curves have similar features.&nbsp; It is highly unlikely that we will return to the January 2007 level of completions.&nbsp; The growth data indicates that we should see between 77,000 and 84,000 units completed recorded during January.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1t_P7gq8OIY/WoXPCn_uAiI/AAAAAAAAS_8/dt0M13RyaYIGkiALeItPEkK0WwrP7xrSgCLcBGAs/s1600/New%2BConstruction%2BForecast%2BJan%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="109" data-original-width="1016" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1t_P7gq8OIY/WoXPCn_uAiI/AAAAAAAAS_8/dt0M13RyaYIGkiALeItPEkK0WwrP7xrSgCLcBGAs/s1600/New%2BConstruction%2BForecast%2BJan%2B20180215.png" /></a></div>This is important to not because without a growing level of units under construction inventory levels for new homes for sale will remain low. Lower inventory can mean higher prices. Lower inventory also creates a logjam for people who want to move out of an existing home into a new home.&nbsp; This data is also important for the jobs data and the retail sales data. We may see an increase in the construction jobs data as more workers enter or re-enter the workforce. We could also see an increasing number of people entering or re-entering the financial services market. New homes also "require" new furniture and new appliances, as well as probably a trip to the Home and Garden Equipment stores.&nbsp; Expect improvement from January 2017 levels of starts, under construction , and completions.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LDQ2kJNMNY4/WoXPMuGDM_I/AAAAAAAATAA/aJL2SO_J31wgpOtOzMUkrayALtRFfPikwCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BPre-report%2BSales%2BASP%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LDQ2kJNMNY4/WoXPMuGDM_I/AAAAAAAATAA/aJL2SO_J31wgpOtOzMUkrayALtRFfPikwCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BPre-report%2BSales%2BASP%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Expect a bump in Units Sold between January 2017 and January 2018.</strong> The New home Construction data indicates that we have been seeing steady improvement in the units sold since 2011. There was a sizable jump between January 2016 and January 2017. Even with that spike in sales we saw fewer home sales recorded during January 2017 than we saw during the month f January between 1992 and 2007. New home sales tend to decline between December and January as people who were "pressed" to close prior to the end of the year, builders or buyers, no longer feel that pressure.&nbsp; The number of units sold can be flat or down month to month and January to January. We could see a slight down tick to 42,00 units sold. This would still be better than January 2015 and January 2016. Expect a number under 50,000 units and do not be surprised if it reaches 51,000 units or 52,000 units. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WWWT3w8iLlk/WoXPlF4htEI/AAAAAAAATAI/IStyNFknjzYWBnF_DMzF-hX6-jvJjBc0gCLcBGAs/s1600/December%2BNew%2BHome%2BInventory%2Bunder%2B300k%2B20180125.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WWWT3w8iLlk/WoXPlF4htEI/AAAAAAAATAI/IStyNFknjzYWBnF_DMzF-hX6-jvJjBc0gCLcBGAs/s640/December%2BNew%2BHome%2BInventory%2Bunder%2B300k%2B20180125.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The Average Sales price could set a record for January.</strong> There was s light drop in the average sales price between January 2018 and January 2017. Even if there is a drop in the average sales price from December's December record then there could be another record set for January.&nbsp; We should see a value between $379,000 and $389,000. While it is possible for a sizeable jump from December to January it is highly unlikely that the initial read will be over $422,000. Expect a record average sales price.&nbsp; Expect a number over $370,000. Anticipate a number over $380,000. A value of $384,900 is would nor be surprising.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SM_cToaWlHc/WoXPuIOKXpI/AAAAAAAATAM/VhsfIZqAZLk9WVOa6X179AJ4J1cqPzz-ACLcBGAs/s1600/New%2BConstruction%2BSAles%2BForecast%2BJanuary%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="89" data-original-width="722" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SM_cToaWlHc/WoXPuIOKXpI/AAAAAAAATAM/VhsfIZqAZLk9WVOa6X179AJ4J1cqPzz-ACLcBGAs/s1600/New%2BConstruction%2BSAles%2BForecast%2BJanuary%2B20180215.png" /></a></div><strong>Will the New Home Inventory Exceed 300,000 Units?</strong> The inventory level for 2017 was almost the same at the end of 1992. It was also lower than 2001. The trend is higher, unlike the existing home market. It is also lower than it was during December 2008 as the market was in a serious recession. The inventory level&nbsp; should continue t improve as under construction units are completed.<br /><br />Watch for improvement in the units sold, the average sales price, and the inventory level.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nEKHRIcjJb4/WoXRYigcchI/AAAAAAAATAY/QPE5VvY-GZQJHVVagRE0xwYRpdBGXrCFwCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BPre-report%2BExisting%2BUnits%2BASP%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nEKHRIcjJb4/WoXRYigcchI/AAAAAAAATAY/QPE5VvY-GZQJHVVagRE0xwYRpdBGXrCFwCLcBGAs/s640/January%2BPre-report%2BExisting%2BUnits%2BASP%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><br />The number of units sold during January had been languishing under 300,000 units until 300,00 until January 2016. We had been well above the 320,000 units during the month of January between 2002 and 2007. While it is possible for the number of units to fall between December and January, as well as between January and January, the the housing market has been improving. The Jobs market has been improving. The cost of rent has been steadily rising. Demand may be increasing for existing homes. The data indicates that 320,000 is definitely possible, 324,000 is probable, and that 329,000 units is a possibility. The units sold data has been languishing due to a lack of inventory. Expect a units sold number in the 320s.<br /><br /><strong>The Average sales Price has been soaring since 2012. Expect it to continue.</strong>&nbsp;We saw a higher than normal December average sales price.&nbsp; In fact, we saw a <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/remarkable-december-existing-home-sales-.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>record December Average Sales Price</strong></a>. The average sales price could drop from the December level and still set a January record. Expect&nbsp; number over $274,900 and under $284,9000. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zM6ONsapxj4/WoXRjMqQ87I/AAAAAAAATAc/FzM2zr-2h3MW9es7ltbtvFPmuAycdXYugCLcBGAs/s1600/Lowest%2BEver%2BExisting%2BHome%2BInventory%2B20180124.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zM6ONsapxj4/WoXRjMqQ87I/AAAAAAAATAc/FzM2zr-2h3MW9es7ltbtvFPmuAycdXYugCLcBGAs/s640/Lowest%2BEver%2BExisting%2BHome%2BInventory%2B20180124.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>How much of an impact will potentially record January inventory level have on the sales price and units sold?</strong> The inventory data fell below the 1.5 million units for the first time. This was lower than any December back to December December 1999, the farthest back the data is available.&nbsp; Will December 2017 or January 2018 be the record low month? It is difficult to sell something that is not on the market.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nw0NbHijGXQ/WoXRqShqNJI/AAAAAAAATAg/-iqs3cjpiGMqacb5jcOe6J4rx8kHvdBZQCLcBGAs/s1600/Existing%2BSales%2BForecast%2BUnits%2BASP%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="106" data-original-width="670" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nw0NbHijGXQ/WoXRqShqNJI/AAAAAAAATAg/-iqs3cjpiGMqacb5jcOe6J4rx8kHvdBZQCLcBGAs/s1600/Existing%2BSales%2BForecast%2BUnits%2BASP%2B20180215.png" /></a></div>Expect the data to be skewed. The average sales price should continue to climb. The number of units sold may low due to a lack of inventory. The average sales price might jump higher due to a lack of inventory. Units might be lower than some expectations because of a low inventory. Both can be true. If enough people report on the soaring average sales prices and the lack of inventory we may see a surge in inventory and a eventually a slowing in the increase in average sales price. Until that time, which may be two or three years away, expect the average sales prices to pop and the units to languish.<br /><br />It's the economy.http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-real-estate-forecast-up-again.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-7961053523279656838Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:21:00 +00002018-02-15T07:21:52.153-08:00Continuing UnemploymentFirst Time UnemployedRemarkable Weekly Unemployment Claims, AgainThe weekly unemployment claims data is being actively ignored, once again. The report includes the non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) first-time unemployment (FTU) claims data and the non-seasonally adjusted continuing claims (CC) data. What is reported is the seasonally adjusted (SA) FTU and the SA CC data, when the continuing claims data is mentioned. The unemployment benefits program began January of 1967. There were fewer than 53 million covered insured at the time. Now we have 140 million covered insured. The seasonally factors used to covert the NSA data to the SA data change by category, week, month, season and year. When seasonally adjusted data from different seasons FACTs (False Assertions Considered to be True) are created. What is the truth? What is reality? A record low level of non-seasonally adjusted first-time claims doesn't garner headlines?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqb9OQhJ9FQ/WoWlAm4JruI/AAAAAAAAS_c/0BKE9rVuDNQQifvrkZB83Y71e2YC-sb_gCLcBGAs/s1600/LOWEST%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BSecoind%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFebruary%2BEVER%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vqb9OQhJ9FQ/WoWlAm4JruI/AAAAAAAAS_c/0BKE9rVuDNQQifvrkZB83Y71e2YC-sb_gCLcBGAs/s640/LOWEST%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BSecoind%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFebruary%2BEVER%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>First Time Claims Recorded a Drop - Reported a Bump up.</strong> The data from last week was revised higher from 240,636 to 242,962. Even so, the NSA FTU value dropped to 233.009 claims. The seasonally adjusted data went from 223,000 claims to 230,000 Claims. Remember that when the SA FTU claims were reported below 300,000 it was reported as the sign of a strong economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yTiLwCO1PYA/WoWlAem9JiI/AAAAAAAAS_Y/vbe_LFikv8YMO2Drn8L1yyr39MdJ2x5_wCLcBGAs/s1600/Second%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFeb%2BFTU%2BFACTS%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="568" data-original-width="579" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yTiLwCO1PYA/WoWlAem9JiI/AAAAAAAAS_Y/vbe_LFikv8YMO2Drn8L1yyr39MdJ2x5_wCLcBGAs/s1600/Second%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFeb%2BFTU%2BFACTS%2B20180215.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>First-time Unemployment Claims Could have been reported under 200,000.</strong> The "headline number was 230,000 SA FTU claims. If we used last year's seasonal factor then the number would have been reported at 226,000. The lowest official SA FTU for this week of the month was 197,000 during February 1969. If we used the same seasonal factor as that week of the year then the SA FTU would have been reported at 184,000 claims not 230,000 claims.&nbsp; If we used the seasonal factors from 2003 then the headline number would have been 207,000. What is the real value? <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_tAiAqXP3DM/WoWlTNo4WvI/AAAAAAAAS_k/drFGQ0rBL0MnkTSHK5K_i9dsK6zGAdCfQCLcBGAs/s1600/Lowest%2BNSA%2BCC%2BFirst%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFebruary%2Bsince%2B1971%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_tAiAqXP3DM/WoWlTNo4WvI/AAAAAAAAS_k/drFGQ0rBL0MnkTSHK5K_i9dsK6zGAdCfQCLcBGAs/s640/Lowest%2BNSA%2BCC%2BFirst%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFebruary%2Bsince%2B1971%2B20180215.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The Non-Seasonally Adjusted Continuing Claims data was the lowest for the first week of February since 1970.</strong> There were 2.7 million continuing claims the first week of February 1971. There were 2.5 million NSA CC during the First week of February 1972. We had 1.83 million claims during the same week of 1970. Remember that we have almost three times as many covered insured as we had during February 1971. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Aj_WTBKnNY4/WoWlSi1ZF8I/AAAAAAAAS_g/7k43XBk4yTYf1SEUkiJcRibpoKp4inCPACLcBGAs/s1600/First%2BWEEk%2Bof%2BFeb%2BCC%2BFACTS%2B20180215.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="546" data-original-width="570" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Aj_WTBKnNY4/WoWlSi1ZF8I/AAAAAAAAS_g/7k43XBk4yTYf1SEUkiJcRibpoKp4inCPACLcBGAs/s1600/First%2BWEEk%2Bof%2BFeb%2BCC%2BFACTS%2B20180215.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>Should they have reported we have 1.9 Million Continuing claims or 1.8 million or 1.708 million?</strong> The seasonal factors matter. First-time claims feed into continuing claims. The continuing claims data lags the first-time claims data by one week. The year over year continuing claims drop started during March of 2009. We started the year with fewer continuing claims than January 1972. The reason that the data is seasonally adjusted is due to the regular weekly spikes in claims. <br /><br /><strong>The rest of the people who cover economic data either actively ignore this data of report it as an oddity.</strong> There used to be a time when the unemployment report data was breaking news at he bottom of the hour on the Thursday that it was released. If you still read the paper it is probably found as an in-column, below the fold mention. Some sources are reporting it as the lowest level in forty plus years - they are relying on the government data and ignoring the seasonal factors. <br /><br /><strong>What does this have to do with you, the reader?</strong> The economic data can help explain what you are seeing in the real world, not in Governmentland. Yesterday we received inflation data that was "higher than expected." <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-inflation-is-lower-than-last-year.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>It was also lower than January 2017</strong></a>. The data reflected commodity deflation and service inflation. Yesterday we also received the January Retail Sales Report. It was reported that sales fell during January, seasonally adjusted. Non-seasonally January retail sales fall from December to January - it is the post Christmas recovery period. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/best-january-retail-sales-month-ever.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>What wasn't reported was that the non-seasonally adjusted sales data was the best total sales data for the month of January ever</strong></a>. We had one of the best January Jobs Reports since 1981 before the data from 2015, 2016, and 2017 were revised. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Instead of reporting an enthusiastic 452,000 seasonally adjusted workers being added to the economy it was reported that a ho-hum 196,000 workers joined the private sector this past January.</strong></a><strong> </strong>We live in Reality. The government lives in Governmentland. <br /><br /><strong>Why is the data as low as it is?</strong> This column has articulated the though that the record low level of full-time employees and the record, or near record, high levels of people working part-time jobs reduced the number of people who are eligible fr unemployment benefits. It was also speculated that the elevated levels of people working multiple jobs, especially multiple part-time jobs, meant that when someone lost one job they still had another job. There is no "lesser employed" insurance program other than having a second job. Seasonal jobs do not count toward the ACA employer mandate to provide insured for full-time workers. Remember that the requirement are based on full-time equivalent hours. <br /><br />All of this data is interrelated. People need jobs to buy things in the stores. People need full-time jobs to qualify for mortgages, most f the time, in order to buy an existing home or a new construction home. New construction sales spur retail sales, especially in the Home and Garden, Furniture, and electronics and appliance sectors. First-time claims give an insight as to where we may be heading. Next week's continuing claims data will give us an indication on where the Jobs Report U-3 Unemployment data may be recorded.&nbsp; Pay attention to the data, not the reports.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/remarkable-weekly-unemployment-claims.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-8535567836409209570Wed, 14 Feb 2018 19:49:00 +00002018-02-14T11:49:35.689-08:00#MARTSAdvance RetailBest January Retail Sales Month Ever<br />The <a href="https://www2.census.gov/retail/releases/historical/marts/adv1801.pdf" target="_blank"><strong>January Monthly and Annual Retail Trade Survey</strong></a> (MARTS) data was released today, along with the report. The majority of the people who are reporting on this topic are reporting on the report and not the data. if they are reporting on the data then they are reporting on the seasonally adjusted data. As with all government reports, the seasonal factors used to convert the non-seasonally adjusted data change from month to month, season to season, and year to year. The best way to examine the data is to look at the raw data and the revisions. Why is the best January Retail Sales data not good enough for the media?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AdbRXz2u2OI/WoSSTZAGZwI/AAAAAAAAS_A/XVICo0bjJ94KJmdySo7QniRNZO6XpERvACLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BMARTS%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AdbRXz2u2OI/WoSSTZAGZwI/AAAAAAAAS_A/XVICo0bjJ94KJmdySo7QniRNZO6XpERvACLcBGAs/s640/January%2BMARTS%2B20180214.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>Non-Store Retail Sales Soared this past month.</strong> There was a considerable amount of good news in this report. The data indicates that all the sectors saw improvement over last January except "Sporting Good and Hobby." The year to year data shows January 2018 vs January 2017 gains of over 6% in Home Furnishings, Building Material Garden Equipment (BMGE,) and Miscellaneous Store Retail. That growth was dwarfed by Non-Store Retail (NSR) which eclipsed Food and Drinking Place sales this month.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WGcjpdBjz_U/WoSSS3aDtDI/AAAAAAAAS-0/eYs6G82_FzAi6Iv72Q0ERvaZ7tsHCbBowCEwYBhgL/s1600/January%2BRevisions%2BMARTS%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="280" data-original-width="1571" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WGcjpdBjz_U/WoSSS3aDtDI/AAAAAAAAS-0/eYs6G82_FzAi6Iv72Q0ERvaZ7tsHCbBowCEwYBhgL/s1600/January%2BRevisions%2BMARTS%2B20180214.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>December sales were revised downward. </strong>This is no big deal. We see regular revisions to the data. The annual growth rate for all of 2017 was 4.44%. This year, the rolling growth rate for the past twelve months, is 5.09%. The largest revisions were to the Electronic and Appliances, Clothing, and Sporting Good and Hobby sales. These sound like Christmas returns hitting the bottom line during January. Those returns should turn into future sales once the "gift cards" are used. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hzxsIfBHPec/WoSSTctQzyI/AAAAAAAAS-8/42Nlx4CKt_UXt2pveVK-VH3aM0uRIMrZACEwYBhgL/s1600/January%2BOnly%2BTotal%2BRetail.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hzxsIfBHPec/WoSSTctQzyI/AAAAAAAAS-8/42Nlx4CKt_UXt2pveVK-VH3aM0uRIMrZACEwYBhgL/s640/January%2BOnly%2BTotal%2BRetail.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>We had the best total January Retail sales month ever. Ever. </strong>There were over 444 billion dollars in total sales during January. This eclipsed last year's January record level of 423 billion dollars. All sectors except Electronics and Appliances are out of the recession. This should be no surprise to regular readers of this column. Some sectors have been below the current month 2007 levels since 2007. Some sectors recover and then fall back. This is good news.<br /><br />The reports record good news and report lackluster data. Why? We need a closer look at the data by the media.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6EZhMR1bXkg/WoSSTSwe4KI/AAAAAAAAS-4/m8I8BC_BAaI_gGjfV4_5p0QjUaqigyK5ACEwYBhgL/s1600/MARTS%2B13-months%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="419" data-original-width="1600" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6EZhMR1bXkg/WoSSTSwe4KI/AAAAAAAAS-4/m8I8BC_BAaI_gGjfV4_5p0QjUaqigyK5ACEwYBhgL/s1600/MARTS%2B13-months%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" /></a></div><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/best-january-retail-sales-month-ever.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2954449192169631674Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:21:00 +00002018-02-14T15:41:27.394-08:00January Inflation is Lower than Last YearThe <b><a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_02142018.pdf" target="_blank">Consumer Price Index data for January</a> </b>was released at the same time as the Monthly and Annual Retail Trade Survey (MARTS) data. The inflation data was rather good, coming in at 1.8% for all items minus food and energy and 2.1% for all items. The "powers that be" were anticipating an annual rate, excluding energy and food, of roughly 1.9%. This makes no sense. What happened? (First graphic is from the report.)<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H13T-UKHzFE/WoRg7URtLkI/AAAAAAAAS-c/okbKpfBFHPYqrvXzT5fACj6BTfDnnbluQCLcBGAs/s1600/CHART%2B2%2BCPI%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="368" data-original-width="727" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H13T-UKHzFE/WoRg7URtLkI/AAAAAAAAS-c/okbKpfBFHPYqrvXzT5fACj6BTfDnnbluQCLcBGAs/s1600/CHART%2B2%2BCPI%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" /></a></div><b>We are Seeing Commodity Deflation and Service Inflation, again.</b> This is a pattern that started late last year. Health insurance finally saw an uptick after months of zero inflation. Medical Care Service, Hospital related services, and Health Insurance are taking a bigger bite out of monthly spending, as their relative importance has risen each of the past two years.<br /><br /><b>We saw food inflation.</b> This has been an area where we had been seeing "savings." The weighting of the components and the variability of inflation rates between categories make comparing "apples to apples" challenging. <br /><br /><b>Shelter Inflation remains above 3%</b>.&nbsp; Shelter takes the largest chunk out of everybody's paychecks. Inventory has been low in the new home market and at historic lows in the existing home markets. Demand has been solid. Strong demand and weak supply will push prices higher. <br /><br />Inflation is okay. This column published an <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/inflation-is-okay.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>article</b></a> by the same name. The trend has been higher. This article was bracing people for the possibility of 3% inflation due to higher participation and a lower effective unemployment rate than what we saw last January.&nbsp; Relax. We had a period of deflation during 2015. Inflation is okay.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NH6TaBrDxWY/WoRg7UtEvsI/AAAAAAAAS-g/qdmtUowD0RwkGIgWnVxf33G-Dod-CHx8wCEwYBhgL/s1600/CPI%2BTable%2B2%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="644" data-original-width="1189" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NH6TaBrDxWY/WoRg7UtEvsI/AAAAAAAAS-g/qdmtUowD0RwkGIgWnVxf33G-Dod-CHx8wCEwYBhgL/s1600/CPI%2BTable%2B2%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ptbaCIIt4pg/WoRg7US5rhI/AAAAAAAAS-Y/uC_JIi3-gyAacxX1_kthiwHC7K_tsBHmACEwYBhgL/s1600/Four%2BThousand%2BDollars%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="665" data-original-width="994" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ptbaCIIt4pg/WoRg7US5rhI/AAAAAAAAS-Y/uC_JIi3-gyAacxX1_kthiwHC7K_tsBHmACEwYBhgL/s1600/Four%2BThousand%2BDollars%2BJanuary%2B20180214.png" /></a></div><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-inflation-is-lower-than-last.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-6408852671494767313Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:15:00 +00002018-02-14T08:15:42.958-08:00January Budget Surplus<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7B6qpmd5MSQ/WoQ24mF46-I/AAAAAAAAS-I/1qhUagN47v08AVnNknDp0S21EAKDvC88gCEwYBhgL/s1600/Debt%2BClock%2B20181213.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="391" data-original-width="704" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7B6qpmd5MSQ/WoQ24mF46-I/AAAAAAAAS-I/1qhUagN47v08AVnNknDp0S21EAKDvC88gCEwYBhgL/s1600/Debt%2BClock%2B20181213.png" /></a></div>The <a href="https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0118.pdf" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Monthly Treasury report for January</b></a> was released Tuesday. The debt clock stands at $20.6 trillion dollars, even after turning a surplus of $49 Billion. The underlying situation can be identified in three tables:<br /><ul><li><a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/963495850629586945" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Table 1</b></a>: Receipts were up from $344 billion (Jan 2017) to $361 billion (Jan. 2018.) Unfortunately Spending is up from $293 billion to $312 billion. Both months ran surpluses. $51 billion versus $49 Billion. </li><li><a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/963496983221719040" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Table 2</b></a>:&nbsp; On-Budget Spending is slated to run a deficit of over $614 billion this year. Off-budget spending is scheduled to run a surplus of nearly $25 billion.</li><li><b><a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/963497776045846529" target="_blank">Table </a>3</b>: Interest on the debt will contribute $503 billion to the deficit this year.</li></ul>This column has written numerous articles on the debt and deficit issue. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/uncle-sam--trust-fund-baby-gone-bust.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Uncle Sam is a Trust Fund Baby</b></a>" details how the Federal Government has raided Trust funds to reduce deficits. A prior article&nbsp; article "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/federal-budget--debt-interest-exploding.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Federal Debt: Still Mortgaging Our Future</b></a>" compares the Debt to the mortgage on a house. We would have to spend $1 trillion a year for thirty years to pay off our debt. That means running a surplus of over $80 a month, every month of the year. <br /><br />The clock is ticking. Improving revenue will hep lower the deficit and the debt only if we rein in spending. Our problem is not Mandatory Spending, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, it is discretionary spending. We need to so discretion on our spending.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-budget-surplus.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-5376456186549255058Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:41:00 +00002018-02-13T07:41:12.075-08:00MARTSRetail Sales ForecastA Potentially Jolly January Retail Report<br />This past year, with the release of the Advance December MARTS Retail report we saw that we had a 5.7 trillion dollar sales year - <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/december-retail-sales-2017.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>the best year ever</strong></a>. This good news was lost by the media. Last year we saw regular annual growth over 4% and we saw annual growth over 7% for November and December.&nbsp; If we see a growth&nbsp; of 5.3% we will hit $6 trillion this year. What can we expect from the January Advance MARTS report this week? Will 2018 be the first $6 trillion retail sales year.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OwMpEzloknU/WoME-kzGJpI/AAAAAAAAS9s/bAoEqlka0h0nRKYJpfeztxvyh7INYIkLACLcBGAs/s1600/January%2BMARTS%2BPre-report%2B20180213.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OwMpEzloknU/WoME-kzGJpI/AAAAAAAAS9s/bAoEqlka0h0nRKYJpfeztxvyh7INYIkLACLcBGAs/s640/January%2BMARTS%2BPre-report%2B20180213.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>Motor Vehicles, Food, and Drink lead the way</strong>.&nbsp; We saw a synchronous drop in gasoline price and Motor Vehicle and parts sales during the Great Recession. We also saw both of them rebound fairly quickly. Food and Beverage Stores as well as Food and Drinking Places. General Merchandise Sales also are fueling the retail market.<br /><br /><strong>Appliances and Electronics, Hobby Sales, and Furniture and Home Furnishings are at the other extreme. </strong>These areas of retail are linked to the real estate market, especially furniture and Appliances. Only electronics and appliances, in this grouping, is experiencing sales at a lower level than they saw pre-recession. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zP28QwBK43g/WoME-mJuvOI/AAAAAAAAS9w/P5FSjrSzN_YX1A1BDVtgx-vHwQ1iIEEZACEwYBhgL/s1600/CM%2BJan%2Bto%2BJan%2BPre-report%2B20180213.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zP28QwBK43g/WoME-mJuvOI/AAAAAAAAS9w/P5FSjrSzN_YX1A1BDVtgx-vHwQ1iIEEZACEwYBhgL/s640/CM%2BJan%2Bto%2BJan%2BPre-report%2B20180213.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Can we hit 6% Annual Growth this month?</strong> We were over 6% during October, November, and December. We were over 5% during January and September of last year. We saw sluggish annual total retail sales growth during January 2014, January 2016, and January 2016. Five percent is probable. Six percent is within reach. Will we break through the 8% level as we did during January 1995, 1997, 2000, and 2006? <br /><br /><strong>All of the Non seasonally adjusted data declines from December to January.</strong> That is what happens after Christmas. If that table were published her is would be all red. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XmHK8plGoWw/WoMFMGGVvhI/AAAAAAAAS90/Wf4KJSvirgs9_P3d3cHDZYZN4MtGRZXCQCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2B2018%2BMARTS%2BY2Y%2B20180213.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="567" data-original-width="1464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XmHK8plGoWw/WoMFMGGVvhI/AAAAAAAAS90/Wf4KJSvirgs9_P3d3cHDZYZN4MtGRZXCQCLcBGAs/s1600/January%2B2018%2BMARTS%2BY2Y%2B20180213.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>What to watch.</strong> Watch the Non-Store Retail sale data, as well as the Building Material sector, the Food and Beverage Store data, and the Health and Personal Care sale data. We had a record retail year last year with weak motor vehicle data during January and weak Hobby data. Clothing sales will almost certainly be lower than last January. The same can be said regarding Electronics and Appliances. Watch the data and the revisions. November's final data and December's preliminary data could both be revised higher.<br /><br />It's the economy.http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/a-potentially-jolly-january-retail.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2690039096598972010Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:45:00 +00002018-02-12T14:45:13.335-08:00#DeflationCPICPI-UInflationInflation is Okay<br />People who have taken a macroeconomics class has heard of the Phillips Curve. The Phillips Curve plots the rate of inflation versus the rate of unemployment. The theory is that you cannot have high inflation and high unemployment at the same time. It also projects that you cannot have low inflation and low unemployment. This "curve" was broken during the Greenspan Years when we had low inflation and low unemployment. This column has written numerous articles on how the unemployment rate that is the headline number, U-3 unemployment, does not factor in the changes in participation. The December non-seasonally adjusted U-3 unemployment rate was&nbsp; 3.9%. The rate of inflation was 2.2%. Is our inflation rate low because our <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/five-presidents-after-12-months--jobs-.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>effective unemployment rate is much higher than 3.9%</strong></a>. It is&nbsp; closer to 9% than 4%. What do you need to know for this week's CPI (Consumer Price Index) Report? Does the Phillips Curve matter?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--NNy_FSzuTw/WoIXBLA0QAI/AAAAAAAAS9U/bDI3Ass8ZjAXmkHwjd95ShYqF3vgvq7tQCLcBGAs/s1600/Three%2BPercent%2BInflation%2BMyth%2B20180212.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--NNy_FSzuTw/WoIXBLA0QAI/AAAAAAAAS9U/bDI3Ass8ZjAXmkHwjd95ShYqF3vgvq7tQCLcBGAs/s640/Three%2BPercent%2BInflation%2BMyth%2B20180212.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>We have been experiencing inflation since the end of 2015.</strong> This doesn't sound like a big thing. We had two periods of deflation since January of 1980:&nbsp; December 2009 through October 2009 and January through October of 2015. This is the CPI-U level, the urban wage earners. Where some people were touting the "savings at the pump," while gas prices were falling and dragging down the retail numbers, this column was calling out the streak of consecutive months with deflation.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-50W1NlbxKvA/WoIXAIYoRXI/AAAAAAAAS9c/7zOpZ0ztIkAOxR7_SnqLsnHwaEPw6prMwCEwYBhgL/s1600/January%2BOnly%2BCPI%2B20180212.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-50W1NlbxKvA/WoIXAIYoRXI/AAAAAAAAS9c/7zOpZ0ztIkAOxR7_SnqLsnHwaEPw6prMwCEwYBhgL/s640/January%2BOnly%2BCPI%2B20180212.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>We have had inflation over 3% during January.</strong> We had inflation over 3% during February 2000 to February 2001. We had inflation over 3% during 2010 (after January 2009 deflation) and January 2012. We had inflation over 4% during January 2006 and January 2008. The closest that we have been to 3.0% lately was 2.82% during February of 2018.<br /><br /><strong>We have been at the bottom of the unemployment rate level during 2017.</strong> We have seen lower unemployment levels during October-December 1999,&nbsp; April 2000, May 2000, and October to Dec 2000. We had official unemployment at nearly 10% during the first period of deflation. We had deflation during a period of time while the official unemployment rate was between 4.8% and 6.1%<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PMLjx_SJ5Fk/WoIXA78CRLI/AAAAAAAAS9c/bfmqYxD30C42Zo95w3IcSdBbpJ04L90eACEwYBhgL/s1600/Scatter%2BEconomy%2B20180212.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PMLjx_SJ5Fk/WoIXA78CRLI/AAAAAAAAS9c/bfmqYxD30C42Zo95w3IcSdBbpJ04L90eACEwYBhgL/s640/Scatter%2BEconomy%2B20180212.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The Sweet Spot appears to be between 4% and 6% Unemployment and 2-4% Inflation.</strong> The participation rate this past month was skewed low by a boost in the workforce population number. A low participation rate masks "real unemployment." If people are not participating then they are neither employed nor unemployed. They are missing participants. Higher inflation may indicate that the real rate of unemployment is decreasing from a range of roughly 8.5% (8.45% to 8.67%.)Unemployment between 8-10% should indicate inflation between 0% to 4%. Could we hit 3% inflation and 5% unemployment? Unemployment was up during January. We know that there was some wage inflation. Will it carryover to the inflation picture this month?<br /><br />Watch for Commodity Deflation and Service Inflation, again. The data has been "interesting" lately with Commodity deflation and Service Inflation. Shelter costs have been soaring. Health insurance inflation has been "non-existent." Where will we see inflation when we see inflation? Will health insurance data rise before commodities? We will find out later this week.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-heI2sLC2q_Y/WoIW_9RzwgI/AAAAAAAAS9Y/kP_V3UX-_Cws1DfwQtjSM-5fS47eaCwCwCEwYBhgL/s1600/CPI%2BPhillips%2B2008%2B2015%2B2018%2B20180212.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="191" data-original-width="962" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-heI2sLC2q_Y/WoIW_9RzwgI/AAAAAAAAS9Y/kP_V3UX-_Cws1DfwQtjSM-5fS47eaCwCwCEwYBhgL/s1600/CPI%2BPhillips%2B2008%2B2015%2B2018%2B20180212.png" /></a></div><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/inflation-is-okay.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2551704521265987869Sat, 10 Feb 2018 14:09:00 +00002018-02-10T06:09:28.615-08:00#JobsReport#MJH#unemployment#Waron(Wo)MenContinuing UnemploymentFirst Time UnemployedPrivate Sector JobsFeb. 10 Week in Review: Revisions Roller CoasterThis was a roller coaster week for the stock market. Two weeks ago the Dow Jones ended at 26,6126. One week ago the DJIA ended the week at 25,520.96. Yesterday the DJIA closed at 24,190.90.&nbsp; Where is the roller coaster? It appears to be all down hill.It was up over 600 points on Tuesday and down over 1000 points on Thursday and then up again by over 300 points on Friday. That is volatility.&nbsp; What also appears to be volatile is the "jobs data." Last Friday, fully a week ago, was the release of the January Jobs Report. This column has been digging into the data ever since its release.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gjUup1-_5FQ/Wn78cfxO5TI/AAAAAAAAS8w/DapfUnPbVKQnnXTvi2HfXOjc07_v7fykgCLcBGAs/s1600/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gjUup1-_5FQ/Wn78cfxO5TI/AAAAAAAAS8w/DapfUnPbVKQnnXTvi2HfXOjc07_v7fykgCLcBGAs/s320/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Feb. 5)</strong>&nbsp; The week began as last week ended, with a review article. The Thursday unemployment report and the Friday Jobs Report generated a considerable amount of data that had changed which delayed the release of the "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/top-ten-articles-of-january-2017.html" style="color: #0000ee;"><strong>Top Ten Articles of January</strong></a>" article. There are three week in review articles, one article on the Federal Budget and the Schumer Shutdown, one article on the Schumer Shutdown and illegal aliens, and an article from 2015 thrown in for good measure.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UsN3oUERe-U/Wn77p2zS3hI/AAAAAAAAS8k/uPoeXLvK5ZIka-hJA5IQqHJ8RVh4QatIwCLcBGAs/s1600/Trump%2BMOnth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1164" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UsN3oUERe-U/Wn77p2zS3hI/AAAAAAAAS8k/uPoeXLvK5ZIka-hJA5IQqHJ8RVh4QatIwCLcBGAs/s640/Trump%2BMOnth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Feb. 5)</strong>&nbsp; How did President Trump do with regard to unemployment, jobs creation, and worker creation during his first 12 months in office compared to Presidents Reagan, Clinton, George W, Bush, and Obama? "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/top-ten-articles-of-january-2017.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Five Presidents after 12 months</strong></a>" details how Presidents Clinton and Trump were the only Presidents to add non-seasonally adjusted jobs. President Clinton added net part-time jobs. President Trump added net full-time jobs. Both reduce unemployment.<br /><br /><strong>(Feb. 6)</strong>&nbsp; When the ADP jobs forecast article was published it was anticipated that all sectors except information technology would show month to month gains. That is what happened. Would the monthly Employment Situation Report reveal the same thing? The Employment Situation Report also includes data regarding the Government Sector. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs--sector-by-sector.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs up in 10 of 11 sectors</strong></a>" digs into the Current Employment Statistics data. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-joTEYp7C3BM/Wn78T4hWU8I/AAAAAAAAS8s/cHOxAFLXoCok3-3E0AA0B81VXlaTQRo4ACEwYBhgL/s1600/Men%2BIceberg%2B20180207.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-joTEYp7C3BM/Wn78T4hWU8I/AAAAAAAAS8s/cHOxAFLXoCok3-3E0AA0B81VXlaTQRo4ACEwYBhgL/s640/Men%2BIceberg%2B20180207.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Feb. 7)</strong> One of the memes generated by the 2012 election was the "War on Women."&nbsp; What would you say if I told you that women were winning the war? "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs--battle-of-the-sexes.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs: Battle of the Sexes</strong></a>" details how women lost fewer full-time jobs than men lost during the recession. Women recovered all of their lost full-time jobs before men recovered theirs. Men are working fewer full-time jobs now than they were working during July 2007, the peak, pre-recession jobs month. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q0NincNdBmQ/Wn78wZcLCHI/AAAAAAAAS80/2G6fMFDg28UE3C_Dn7_k6qeIdsx_UoqNwCLcBGAs/s1600/Lowest%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BFirst%2BWeek%2BFeb%2B20180208.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q0NincNdBmQ/Wn78wZcLCHI/AAAAAAAAS80/2G6fMFDg28UE3C_Dn7_k6qeIdsx_UoqNwCLcBGAs/s640/Lowest%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BFirst%2BWeek%2BFeb%2B20180208.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Feb. 8)</strong> Thursday is Unemployment Claims Day whenever there isn't a national holiday.&nbsp; When the first-time claims data fell below 300,000 seasonally adjusted claims there were "trumpets." We saw the non-seasonally adjusted first-time unemployment claims for the first week of February drop to the lowest level ever recorded. Instead of TRUMPets, we received crickets.We saw "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/crazy-low-first-time-unemployment-claims-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Crazy Low First-time Unemployment claims</strong></a>" actively ignored by the media and the DJIA convulsed.<br /><br /><strong>(Feb. 9)</strong> Last week this column wrote two articles regarding the data used in the employment situation report. The Current Employment Statistics (CES) data measures workers. The Non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) and the seasonally adjusted (SA) CES data was revised from 2015 through 2017 for every month of the year. There were also revisions going back into the 1990s. The Current Population Survey (CPS) data measures unemployment workers, full-time jobs, part-time jobs, and the workforce population.&nbsp; The only data that appeared to be "augmented" was the workforce population number. The population number spiked more than it had all year and rebounded by the same percentage as it was reduced during President Obama's final month of his Presidency.&nbsp; The Jobs report includes data on the number of people working multiple jobs.&nbsp; All of the seasonally adjusted data from January 2012 through November 2017 were revised. None of the underlying SA data was revised.&nbsp; "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-record-for-multiple-job-workers.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Record for Multiple Job Workers</strong></a>" details how we had the most people working two part-time jobs during January that has ever been reported. The same can be said for January workers working two full-time jobs. <br /><br />There is more happening in the economy than is being reported. The CES data from 2015 was revised downward in order to boost the data for 2016. The data from 2016 was also boosted higher on top of the boost received from 2015. The data from 2017 was also revised higher. This data being revised brought down the bump experienced during January of 2018. Data is revised on a regular basis. Most reports have an advance vale, a preliminary value, and a "final" value.&nbsp; What was so important that the data from three years of CES data had to be revised? What was so important that nearly five years of seasonally adjusted only&nbsp; multiple job worker data had to be revised?&nbsp; Was the jobs data so good that it "caused" a correction in the Dow Jones? Was it the Nunes memo? Was it the Schiff memo that has not been cleared for release? Was it the Rand Paul Shutdown? There is only one thing for sure....<br /><br />It's the economy. <br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/feb-10-week-in-review-revisions-roller.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-8195654689366197444Fri, 09 Feb 2018 14:26:00 +00002018-02-09T06:26:53.541-08:00#JobsReportCurrent Employment StatisticsCurrent Population SurveyMJHJanuary Record for Multiple Job WorkersThe January Employment Situation Report, or Jobs Report, was released this past Friday, one week ago. There was a considerable amount of data to digest. The Current Employment Statistics (CES) worker data saw considerable revisions, mostly to the data from 2015 through 2017. These revisions created a surprise. The Current Population Survey data was unchanged for the same period of time. The surprise here was the dramatic upward revision to the workforce population value.&nbsp; This upward revision negatively impacted the workforce participation number. So far four articles have been written:<br /><ul><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs Surprise</strong></a>" details how the Seasonally Adjusted (SA) Private Sector Workers data could have been reported up 452,000 workers, instead of the 196,000 that was reported.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Seriously Strong CPS Data</strong></a>" detailed how we had one of the best January reports since 2003 with minor drops in non-seasonally adjusted full-time and part-time jobs and a minor uptick in unemployment. This is normal to see drops in jobs and drops in workers, non-seasonally adjusted, during January. It is one of the reason that the data is seasonally adjusted.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs--sector-by-sector.html" style="color: #0000ee;"><strong>Five Presidents after 12 months: Jobs</strong></a>" compared President Trumps data to Presidents Reagan, Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama. President Trump and President Clinton had great first years - each adding approximately 2.3 million jobs. President Clinton added 2.3 million net part-time jobs and President Trump added a net 2.3 million full-time jobs.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs--sector-by-sector.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs up in 10 of 11 Sectors</strong></a>" details how all sectors lost non-seasonally adjusted workers, ten of eleven sectors gained workers, and how the data from 2015 was revised lower, while the data from 2016 and 2017</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs--battle-of-the-sexes.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs: Battle of the Sexes</strong></a>" could have been titled "Men Not Working." Fewer men were working full-time jobs during January 2018 than July 2007. That is not a typo. Ten plus years later fewer men are working full-time jobs.</li></ul>Add to the data that was massively revised this past month was the multiple jobholder data from 2012-2017, except for December 2017. Why does this matter? Multiple job workers "depress" participation by having some people "over-participate." Multiple job workers do not receive "less-employed" benefits when they lose their jobs.&nbsp; There were many silent revisions released in the January Jobs Report. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VdS2bOvEePs/Wn2upfdEyGI/AAAAAAAAS8E/le3SVT5ZfJofgDq1ZDoi2Cr6mjCOxuJEwCLcBGAs/s1600/MJH%2BTotal%2B20180209.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1164" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VdS2bOvEePs/Wn2upfdEyGI/AAAAAAAAS8E/le3SVT5ZfJofgDq1ZDoi2Cr6mjCOxuJEwCLcBGAs/s640/MJH%2BTotal%2B20180209.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>We had a near record level of Multiple Job Workers for the Month of January.</strong> You did not hear this in the mainstream media because "all" they care about is the headline number of "seasonally adjusted jobs" created and the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate. What they are really reporting is the number of workers added to the economy. January is a job loss month, non-seasonally adjusted. January is a worker loss month, non-seasonally adjusted. If there were no seasonally adjusted data there would have been no "jobs streak" under any President.&nbsp; The number of Multiple jobholders has depressed participation by having some people over-participate and some people under-participate. We had over 7.75 million people work multiple jobs this past month.&nbsp; <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Adyrh_HBg9k/Wn2upakvIfI/AAAAAAAAS8M/4suYN_9OnyUfHUqVHzWsSX6hBmgsdze-gCLcBGAs/s1600/Dual%2BPT%2BRecord%2BJanuary%2B20180209.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Adyrh_HBg9k/Wn2upakvIfI/AAAAAAAAS8M/4suYN_9OnyUfHUqVHzWsSX6hBmgsdze-gCLcBGAs/s640/Dual%2BPT%2BRecord%2BJanuary%2B20180209.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>More People Working Two part-time Jobs.</strong>&nbsp; There are four basic ways that a person can work multiple jobs, only three of them have their own data categories. People can work two full-time jobs. People can work two part-time jobs. People can work a primary full-time job and a secondary part-time job. The keepers of the data also measure a "hours vary by period" category. When all of these categories are combined it does not equal the total multiple jobs worked category.This column has reported a primary part-time secondary full-time value as the remainder from the Total MJH minus the FT-FT minus the FT-PT minus the PT-PT worker data.&nbsp; We had over 2 million people working two part-time jobs during January of 2018. The first time we ever recorded over two million people working two part-time jobs was during April of 2009. We saw two months of PT-Pt over two million during 2012. That happened three times during 2013, four times during 2014, three times during 2015, eight times during 2016,&nbsp; and five times during 2017. This column has hypothesized that this is an unintentional consequence of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6q_zvDkDCzM/Wn2u6teCl5I/AAAAAAAAS8Q/-WQZZthu530YnMDOLVva0sIsw7DrPleggCLcBGAs/s1600/MJH%2BTable%2B20180209.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="579" data-original-width="404" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6q_zvDkDCzM/Wn2u6teCl5I/AAAAAAAAS8Q/-WQZZthu530YnMDOLVva0sIsw7DrPleggCLcBGAs/s1600/MJH%2BTable%2B20180209.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>We had a January Record number of people working two full-time jobs.</strong> There were 339,000 people working two full-time jobs last month. That number during 2017 was 302,000. We had only eclipsed 300,000 FT-FT workers once before that time and that was during 1999.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4SS-ZrkvfQ4/Wn2upYIAsEI/AAAAAAAAS8I/9oLa3VDzGYQ7beSCdCUa1lxGHIWZ9J1lwCLcBGAs/s1600/MJH%2BSA%2BData%2Brevisions%2B20180209.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4SS-ZrkvfQ4/Wn2upYIAsEI/AAAAAAAAS8I/9oLa3VDzGYQ7beSCdCUa1lxGHIWZ9J1lwCLcBGAs/s640/MJH%2BSA%2BData%2Brevisions%2B20180209.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The seasonally adjusted total multiple job workers data was revised from 2012 through November 2017.</strong> Note that the underlying non-seasonally adjusted total multiple jobholder data were not revised. This is part of the reason why this column focuses on the non-seasonally adjusted data. The seasonal factors used to convert non-seasonally adjusted data from month to month, season to season, and year to year. What changed regarding the data between 2012 and last month that needed massive revisions to the seasonally adjusted data without touching the non-seasonally adjusted total multiple job holder data?<br /><br /><strong>We saw massive revisions to the Current Employment Statistics data last month.</strong> This data, the multiple job holder data, is found in Table A-16. This is part of the Household data set. This is where the Current Population Survey data is found. The B-Tables are the employer data and are derived from the Current Employment Statistics data set. It was thought that the only datum that was changed in the CPS data was the workforce population growth rate. This impacted the workforce participation rate data. It turns out that the population datum was not the only data revised in the CPS data set. The most notable changes were January through June, plus August, of 2017. It is also noticeable that he data from January through May were predominantly revised lower and the September through December data were revised higher than originally reported during the December Jobs Report.<br /><br />There is much more to the Employment Situation report than just the headline "jobs" number and the headline unemployment data. We had one of the best January Jobs reports released on the same day as the "Nunes memo." that is unfortunate. It is unfortunate because the data was remarkable. We had one of the best NSA CES private sector worker growth rates that we have seen since 1981, in that we did not contract as much as we could have contracted.We did not see jobs decline as much as they normally do contract during January, as they "always" contract. We saw the best January for Men and for Women for full-time jobs since 2007. There is general sector growth. We have people working multiple jobs.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-record-for-multiple-job-workers.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-7734622011651344484Thu, 08 Feb 2018 15:42:00 +00002018-02-08T07:42:50.190-08:00Continuing UnemploymentFirst Time UnemployedCrazy Low First-time Unemployment Claims Data<br />The Weekly Unemployment claims data was released at 8:30 AM today, Thursday February 8th. The data released includes the non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) first-time unemployment (FTU) claims data and the Non-Seasonally Adjusted Continuing Claims (CC) data. The data that is reported, when it is reported, is the Seasonally Adjusted (SA) FTU and SA CC value. The seasonal factors used to convert the NSA data to the SA data changes from week to week, month to month, season to season, and year to year. When seasonally adjusted data from different weeks of the year are compared False Assertions Considered to be True (FACTs) are created. The biggest FACT was President Obama's Private Sector Job Creation streak. The second biggest FACT is the Seasonally adjusted First-time Unemployment Claims Streak. Both of these are covered in the article "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/economic-urban-legends.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Economic Urban Legends</strong></a>." What you need to know is that the trend for both NSA FTU and NSA CC data is downward through May. So what happened this past week? This is "the most unloved" economic report.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-m-t7IkGv_So/Wnxvlk-3J9I/AAAAAAAAS7g/N56T5F20qdQ2ohgKoRpz1Vz-ycaVXR8KQCLcBGAs/s1600/Lowest%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BFirst%2BWeek%2BFeb%2B20180208.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-m-t7IkGv_So/Wnxvlk-3J9I/AAAAAAAAS7g/N56T5F20qdQ2ohgKoRpz1Vz-ycaVXR8KQCLcBGAs/s640/Lowest%2BNSA%2BFTU%2BFirst%2BWeek%2BFeb%2B20180208.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The Non-seasonally Adjusted First-time Unemployment Claims data is at the Lowest it has ever been for the First-week of February. Ever. </strong>The unemployment claims program began during January of 1967.&nbsp; Last year we had 259,000 NSA FTU claims. This year we had 240,636 claims. We often have had over 400,000 NSA FTU claims during the first week of February. How low can this number fall? Could it drop below 200,000 NSA FTU?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xxdJI8P7_7Q/WnxvlOXKK6I/AAAAAAAAS7c/j7x17rj62Jkl5k6qYscuoc6SDPD7d3VWwCLcBGAs/s1600/First%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFeb%2BRecord%2BLow%2BNSA%2BFTU%2B20180208.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="568" data-original-width="579" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xxdJI8P7_7Q/WnxvlOXKK6I/AAAAAAAAS7c/j7x17rj62Jkl5k6qYscuoc6SDPD7d3VWwCLcBGAs/s1600/First%2BWeek%2Bof%2BFeb%2BRecord%2BLow%2BNSA%2BFTU%2B20180208.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>The Seasonally Adjusted First-time Claims data was "reported" at 221,000 claims. </strong>The world reported is in quotations because this number has been rarely reported since the election of 2016. If we used the seasonal factors used between 2000-2005 the headline number would have been reported as low as 205,000 claims. If the factor for the first week of February 1988 was applied to today's data then the number would have been reported at 201,000 claims. If we used the seasonal factors from the early years of the program then we would have had a headline number of 189,000 claims. This is fascinating how much this data is being actively ignored elsewhere. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-20775L0EiG8/WnxvwLMdfUI/AAAAAAAAS7o/1L5MeDaU85kASf-Sj7SvlQNknADL7NOagCLcBGAs/s1600/Lowest%2BNSA%2BCC%2BFourth%2BWeek%2Bof%2BJan%2BSince%2B1972%2B20180208.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-20775L0EiG8/WnxvwLMdfUI/AAAAAAAAS7o/1L5MeDaU85kASf-Sj7SvlQNknADL7NOagCLcBGAs/s640/Lowest%2BNSA%2BCC%2BFourth%2BWeek%2Bof%2BJan%2BSince%2B1972%2B20180208.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The Non-Seasonally Adjusted Continuing Claims data for the fourth week of January was lower than the same week 1972 to date. </strong>This is not quite the lowest NSA CC level ever. The FTU claims data feeds into the continuing claims data. The CC data lags the FTU data by one week. A continuing claims level under under 3 million this time of year was good. We often have a continuing claims level under 4 million claims. There was the possibility of a minor uptick in the NSA CC value this week, based on prior year data. This was a drop of 2.9%. The continuing claims data should continue to fall through May. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-r5SlMIkxsqM/WnxvvjWJ-DI/AAAAAAAAS7k/kMAwQ0Gyiroxc_jVc7skQJJXCaiRX_HfACLcBGAs/s1600/Fourth%2BWeek%2BJanuary%2BCC%2BFACT%2B20180208.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="546" data-original-width="570" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-r5SlMIkxsqM/WnxvvjWJ-DI/AAAAAAAAS7k/kMAwQ0Gyiroxc_jVc7skQJJXCaiRX_HfACLcBGAs/s1600/Fourth%2BWeek%2BJanuary%2BCC%2BFACT%2B20180208.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>How low can the Continuing Claims fall?</strong> There are weekly patterns that are observable in the data. Some weeks the NSA FTU claims pop up a little and the continuing claims follow higher the next week. Some weeks the NSA FTU drops and the NSA CC value falls the next week. The weeks where we traditionally see spikes are often seasonally adjusted into a smoother line. The authors of the report used to publish the seasonal factors months in advance. They no longer publish the data back to the beginning. They no longer archive the reports. The data indicates that we could see the lowest first-time claims data any given week of the year through October. Will we drop below the November 5, 1988 low this October or November? It is possible. <br /><br /><strong>When will the NSA First-time Unemployment Claims level drop below 200,000? </strong>How low can the First-time Claims data fall?&nbsp; We dropped below 200,000 NSA FTU for the first time "forever" during the second week of August 2015. We dropped below 200,000 NSA FTU three times during 2016, the weeks of 8/13, 9/10, and 9/24. we dropped below 200,000 NSA FTU claims four time s during 2017 between 7/29 and 8/26. Four times in a five week spread. We almost dropped below 200,000 on 9/30/2017 when we were at 204,000 NSA FTU claims. This information was ignored as it was happening. Could the election have turned out differently if the real numbers were reported? Will these numbers be referenced prior to the 2018 mid-term elections?<br /><br />Next week we will receive the FTU claims data for the second week of February. This is important because the data from next week will give a glimpse to what is possible for the official U-3 unemployment number for the February Jobs report. The following week we will receive the continuing claims data for the same week for the month. The <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Current Population Survey data was strong this January</strong></a>. If you thought that <a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/959517166784712704" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>the unemployment claims data for this month was great, the lowest since 2002</strong></a>. Will anybody else catch on to this trend. Spread the word.<br /><br />It's the economy. <br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/crazy-low-first-time-unemployment.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-9120061975090741716Wed, 07 Feb 2018 16:43:00 +00002018-02-07T08:43:52.923-08:00#JobsReport#Waron(Wo)MenJanuary Jobs: Battle of the SexesThe January Employment Situation Report, or Jobs Report, was released this past Friday. There was a considerable amount of data to digest. The Current Employment Statistics (CES) worker data saw considerable revisions, mostly to the data from 2015 through 2017. These revisions created a surprise. The Current Population Survey data was unchanged for the same period of time. The surprise here was the dramatic upward revision to the workforce population value.&nbsp; This upward revision negatively impacted the workforce participation number. So far four articles have been written:<br /><ul><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs Surprise</strong></a>" details how the Seasonally Adjusted (SA) Private Sector Workers data could have been reported up 452,000 workers, instead of the 196,000 that was reported.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Seriously Strong CPS Data</strong></a>" detailed how we had one of the best January reports since 2003 with minor drops in non-seasonally adjusted full-time and part-time jobs and a minor uptick in unemployment. This is normal to see drops in jobs and drops in workers, non-seasonally adjusted, during January. It is one of the reason that the data is seasonally adjusted.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/five-presidents-after-12-months--jobs-.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Five Presidents after 12 months: Jobs</strong></a>" compared President Trumps data to Presidents Reagan, Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama. President Trump and President Clinton had great first years - each adding approximately 2.3 million jobs. President Clinton added 2.3 million net part-time jobs and President Trump added a net 2.3 million full-time jobs.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs--sector-by-sector.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs up in 10 of 11</strong></a> Sectors" details how all sectors lost non-seasonally adjusted workers, ten of eleven sectors gained workers, and how the data from 2015 was revised lower, while the data from 2016 and 2017 </li></ul>How is everyone doing? Are some people doing better than others? This column has generated a number of article series off of Internet memes. The "War on Women" meme from the 2012 and 2016 Presidential selections caused this column to examine the claims that women are being targeted. They may be. They me be being targeted for more full-time jobs. They may be being targeted for more part-time jobs.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RSO39txb6Ec/WnsqyAK-tiI/AAAAAAAAS64/wfmZasR3NvgdX4ca7nimcau4wowewbnfgCLcBGAs/s1600/Men%2BIceberg%2B20180207.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-RSO39txb6Ec/WnsqyAK-tiI/AAAAAAAAS64/wfmZasR3NvgdX4ca7nimcau4wowewbnfgCLcBGAs/s640/Men%2BIceberg%2B20180207.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Fewer Men are working full-time jobs now than July 2007.</strong> That is not a typographical error. There are fewer men working full-time now than 10 1/2 years ago. Men had lost&nbsp; million full-time jobs between July 2007 and January 2010. It took until July 2016 for all of those full-time jobs to be recovered, before they were lost, again. Men added jobs during the late Spring and Summer of 2017&nbsp; before&nbsp; they&nbsp; before losing those full-time jobs, again. This is not all doom and gloom. There were 1.2 million more men working full-time jobs during January 2018 than during January 2017. There were also 132,000 more men working part-time jobs during January 2018 versus January 2017.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xEOIEmLCi0I/WnsqyvGGq-I/AAAAAAAAS7E/U41ntnqSn5AAkC_SeknaTPQS8NGxi4yPgCEwYBhgL/s1600/Women%2BMountain%2B20180207.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xEOIEmLCi0I/WnsqyvGGq-I/AAAAAAAAS7E/U41ntnqSn5AAkC_SeknaTPQS8NGxi4yPgCEwYBhgL/s640/Women%2BMountain%2B20180207.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Women have created Four Million New Jobs Since July 2007.</strong>&nbsp; That sounds pretty good. They lost 3.8 million part-time jobs by January 2010.&nbsp; They had recovered all of their lost Full-time jobs by the Summer of 2015 and never looked back. The problem is that women have added 12.8 million workers to their workforce population. Men have added 11.9 million workers to their workforce population. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BzPBNduN3aA/WnsqyCVA2vI/AAAAAAAAS68/kEuD3Eoq520snL5ITyD2LNQiAg4unk4iQCEwYBhgL/s1600/Men%2BWomen%2BParticipation%2BRates%2B20180207.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BzPBNduN3aA/WnsqyCVA2vI/AAAAAAAAS68/kEuD3Eoq520snL5ITyD2LNQiAg4unk4iQCEwYBhgL/s640/Men%2BWomen%2BParticipation%2BRates%2B20180207.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Population Matters.</strong> This column has written many articles regarding the workforce participation rate and missing participants. It has been reported elsewhere that the participation rate has been falling because Baby Boomers have been retiring. This column has written articles showing that people are working longer into their golden years. What is interesting, if you examine the Jobs Iceberg histograms for men and women, is that both populations saw decreases in their workforce population during January 2017 and&nbsp; spikes in their their populations during January 2018. When the population is reduced it gives an artificial boost the the workforce participation rate . When the population is boosted it reduces the workforce participation rate. The reduction in the total population kept President Obama from having his workforce participation drop during his final month in office.&nbsp; The January Participation rate is the lowest for women that it has been since 2003. Men saw their participation improve December to January. Even with the population changes they have a comparable participation rate to January 2017 and a higher rate than January 2016.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rzoTfrPsLZU/WnsqxkCzJYI/AAAAAAAAS60/2KW4dPAtX1gaTjM28JGgC9YvBbgRHBEGgCEwYBhgL/s1600/Men%2BU-7%2B20180207.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="323" data-original-width="237" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rzoTfrPsLZU/WnsqxkCzJYI/AAAAAAAAS60/2KW4dPAtX1gaTjM28JGgC9YvBbgRHBEGgCEwYBhgL/s320/Men%2BU-7%2B20180207.png" width="234" /></a></div>&nbsp;<strong>What are the real unemployment rates for men and women.</strong> The non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for men was 4.479% during January 2018. This is a full percentage point lower than January 2008. This should be good news. The participation rate is down by 4%. This is not good news. Unemployed workers are participants. If they are not employed or unemployed they are effectively unemployed. The effective unemployment rate for men, keeping the participation rate constant, is 10.08%. If the same analysis is done to the U-3 unemployment rate has dropped from 5.87% to 4.79%. This should be good. The effective Unemployment Rate for women is 8.61%. Five percent unemployment has been considered full-employment. Are we at full employment without full participation?<br /><br />The Devil is in the details. The Devil is in the data. We had a great January Jobs report. Unadjusted workers and unadjusted jobs did not fall as much as they could have fallen. Unemployment was up - and yet it was the lowest it had been<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2FadvGAyqdA/Wnsqyjxs4PI/AAAAAAAAS7I/rjUtsNM7k9wwkK-t7ebrCo9RSqh6hAsZQCEwYBhgL/s1600/Women%2BU-7%2B20180207.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="323" data-original-width="237" height="320" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2FadvGAyqdA/Wnsqyjxs4PI/AAAAAAAAS7I/rjUtsNM7k9wwkK-t7ebrCo9RSqh6hAsZQCEwYBhgL/s320/Women%2BU-7%2B20180207.png" width="234" /></a>for the month of January since 2002. President Trump has added more jobs than Presidents Reagan, George W. Bush, or Obama during their first 12 months in office. President Trump added full-time jobs while President Clinton added part-time jobs. More jobs generates more retail sales. More full-time jobs means more people eligible for health insurance coverage through their employers. This is a virtuous cycle.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-jobs-battle-of-sexes.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2130914465901192312Tue, 06 Feb 2018 22:48:00 +00002018-02-06T14:48:52.188-08:00January Jobs up in 10 of 11 Sectors from January 2017<br />The January Employment Situation Report, or Jobs Report, was released this past Friday. There was a considerable amount of data to digest. The Current Employment Statistics (CES) worker data saw considerable revisions, mostly to the data from 2015 through 2017. These revisions created a surprise. The Current Population Survey data was unchanged for the same period of time. The surprise here was the dramatic upward revision to the workforce population value.&nbsp; This upward revision negatively impacted the workforce participation number. So far three articles have been written:<br /><ul><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs Surprise</strong></a>" details how the Seasonally Adjusted (SA) Private Sector Workers data could have been reported up 452,000 workers, instead of the 196,000 that was reported.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Seriously Strong CPS Data</strong></a>" detailed how we had one of the best January reports since 2003 with minor drops in non-seasonally adjusted full-time and part-time jobs and a minor uptick in unemployment. This is normal to see drops in jobs and drops in workers, non-seasonally adjusted, during January. It is one of the reason that the data is seasonally adjusted.</li><li>"<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/five-presidents-after-12-months--jobs-.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Five Presidents after 12 months: Jobs</strong></a>" compared President Trumps data to Presidents Reagan, Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama. President Trump and President Clinton had great first years - each adding approximately 2.3 million jobs. President Clinton added 2.3 million net part-time jobs and President Trump added a net 2.3 million full-time jobs.</li></ul>The data can be examined a number of different ways. One way is to examine the sector data. Here's the problem - the seasonally adjusted data was revised back to 1990. There were minuscule changes in the NSA CES data between 1990 and 2014. The data for 2015-2017 was revised in both data sets.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lmJ6g_Ivr_4/Wnov3z0Rj9I/AAAAAAAAS6Q/IE2KnmKSfZYMwWEaxA61TiYzEN6eR_EqgCLcBGAs/s1600/RSEU%2BNSA%2BCHart%2B20180206.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lmJ6g_Ivr_4/Wnov3z0Rj9I/AAAAAAAAS6Q/IE2KnmKSfZYMwWEaxA61TiYzEN6eR_EqgCLcBGAs/s640/RSEU%2BNSA%2BCHart%2B20180206.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Non-seasonally adjusted workers are up over January 2017 in all sectors except Information technology.</strong> Only Government and IT have fewer jobs than January 2009. Construction and Manufacturing, though, have fewer workers than they had during January 2007. Even the Government sector has added 209,000 workers since 2007.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oxUHwejiwuI/WnowM-lljtI/AAAAAAAAS6U/y7ZytN80vV42L-Elfeb2UD1ClsTP8S3TwCLcBGAs/s1600/Changes%2BNSA%2BCES%2BDATA%2BDec-Jan%2B20180206.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="168" data-original-width="1362" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oxUHwejiwuI/WnowM-lljtI/AAAAAAAAS6U/y7ZytN80vV42L-Elfeb2UD1ClsTP8S3TwCLcBGAs/s1600/Changes%2BNSA%2BCES%2BDATA%2BDec-Jan%2B20180206.png" /></a></div><strong>The date from 2015 was revised lower - bumping the values for 2016. </strong>The data from 2015 was revised down 53,000 workers while the 2016 data was revised up 106,000. This means that if the 2015 was left untouched the 2016 values could have improved by 159,000 workers. Seasonally adjusted it went up 112,000 from the December values for 2016.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><strong>The data from 2017 was bumped up 212,000 workers - borrowing from the January surge.</strong> The seasonally adjusted data for 2017 was revised up by 247,000. This borrowed 247,000 from the January data. We could have seen a number of well over 440,000 workers as the headline number.<br /><br /><strong>The biggest gains have been in three sectors.</strong> We have seen the most workers added in the Professional and Business Sector, the Leisure and Hospitality Sector, and the Education and Health Sector. This has been an incomplete recovery.<br /><br />When the employment situation forecast article was released there was a comment that we needed to watch the revisions to prior data and the seasonal factors used. Those concerns now seem well founded. The jobs and worker numbers are rebounding.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--daKvAt4JzA/WnoweBU1JmI/AAAAAAAAS6c/FCVnfiaevVkueq4Khl88u8xe6cRmbIm6wCLcBGAs/s1600/RSEU%2BCES%2BNSA%2BTables%2B%2BJanuary%2B20180206.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="827" data-original-width="1395" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--daKvAt4JzA/WnoweBU1JmI/AAAAAAAAS6c/FCVnfiaevVkueq4Khl88u8xe6cRmbIm6wCLcBGAs/s1600/RSEU%2BCES%2BNSA%2BTables%2B%2BJanuary%2B20180206.png" /></a></div><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-jobs-up-in-10-of-11-sectors.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-7638528198803288164Mon, 05 Feb 2018 22:11:00 +00002018-02-09T06:35:41.886-08:00Five Presidents after 12 months: JobsThe monthly employment situation report for January was released this past Friday. The report was overshadowed by the "Nunes Memo" on the Trump Dossier. This is unfortunate. There were big stories to be found in the Jobs Report. The first article written this past Friday was "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" target="_blank"><b>January Jobs Surprise</b></a>." The surprise wasn't that there were 200,000 "jobs" added to the economy. The surprise was that the data for 2016 and 2017 were revised in such a way that the 2017 data was revised up by over 200,000 seasonally adjusted workers. This "stole" those same people from the January data. The headline private sector number could have been reported at 452,000 workers instead of 196,000 (the other 4,000 were in the government sector.) The second article written on Saturday morning was "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Seriously Strong January CPS Jobs Data</b></a>." The first article examined the Current Employment Statistics (CES data.) The second article examined the Current Population Survey (CPS) data. The CPS data measures the workforce population, the number of part-time workers, the number of full-time workers, and the number of unemployed workers. There were only one change in the CPS data, the rate of growth in the population. The Workforce population spiked, bringing down the workforce participation rate. The question is how are we doing compared to other Presidents during their first year? Which President is, or was, the jobs President?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DHUc6RFBd_M/WnjUiucrgvI/AAAAAAAAS5c/qsTvc1Dv2ysgpfvUaB-1i_jLv4zTdg1iwCLcBGAs/s1600/Trump%2BMOnth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1164" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DHUc6RFBd_M/WnjUiucrgvI/AAAAAAAAS5c/qsTvc1Dv2ysgpfvUaB-1i_jLv4zTdg1iwCLcBGAs/s640/Trump%2BMOnth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>President Trump has added 2.4 Million Full-time jobs.</b> This is sizable. He has also overseen the trimming of the unemployment levels by nearly 1 million workers. The "problem" is that unemployed workers are participants. This means that the Workforce participation rate is lower now than when he took office. Notice that there have been two upwards revisions to the workforce population.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dQkkRnxTwNI/WnjUw2uIN3I/AAAAAAAAS5g/Pf9bzd5U0RohtgR0mrNxgpxXw3WtqRBywCLcBGAs/s1600/Clinton%2BMOnth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dQkkRnxTwNI/WnjUw2uIN3I/AAAAAAAAS5g/Pf9bzd5U0RohtgR0mrNxgpxXw3WtqRBywCLcBGAs/s640/Clinton%2BMOnth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>President Clinton added 3 Million Jobs his first year - Part-time Jobs.</b>&nbsp; President Clinton also trimmed unemployed workers. Look at the population growth - it was less than President Trump - in part because the economy was smaller back then, in part because <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/four-presidents-at-96-months--participation-matters.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>they did not revise the population numbers often under President Clinton</b></a>. When they did revise it, it was at the end of his Presidency and it was big. If you compare the two economies, President Trump has added more Full-time Jobs and reduced the unemployment levels more. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Q1mYT-F-0Kk/WnjU6NzPDMI/AAAAAAAAS5k/ooDvZiMVRNU_FgdIciIrouLtcvri5SQGQCLcBGAs/s1600/Reagan%2BMonth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Q1mYT-F-0Kk/WnjU6NzPDMI/AAAAAAAAS5k/ooDvZiMVRNU_FgdIciIrouLtcvri5SQGQCLcBGAs/s640/Reagan%2BMonth%2B12%2BFT%2BPT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>President Reagan inherited a recession, and it showed in his numbers.</b> The number of unemployed workers grew by 1.4 million workers. There were 950,000 fewer full-time workers and 641,000 more part-time workers than he had during his first full month in office. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8TKxyL-DvZ4/WnjWV1-9F5I/AAAAAAAAS6A/8ieLGYR-sucdt-nrrTE9sF9Pd7dstzV5QCLcBGAs/s1600/Bush%2BMonth%2B12%2BPT%2BFT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8TKxyL-DvZ4/WnjWV1-9F5I/AAAAAAAAS6A/8ieLGYR-sucdt-nrrTE9sF9Pd7dstzV5QCLcBGAs/s640/Bush%2BMonth%2B12%2BPT%2BFT%2BU3%2B20180205.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br /><b>President George W. Bush inherited a Recession, and it showed in his numbers, too.</b> Remember that President Bush came into office during January 2001 and we had the terror attacks of September 1, 2001. That event sent ripples through the economy after the "dotcom" crash at the end of 2000. President Bush lost over 1.6 million full-time jobs. This was worse than President Reagan. President Bush had a larger base with which to wok than President Reagan. What was unexpected was that part-time jobs also fell. Often when employers sense a recession coming they trim full-time jobs and boost part-time jobs.<br /><br /><b>President Obama Lost over 5 million Full-time Jobs.</b> Unemployment spiked by over 3 million workers. Part-time jobs surged by 1.4 million jobs. Where President Trump has seen two upward revisions in his workforce population number, President Obama saw a downward revision to the population during his twelfth month. All of the Presidents added to the workforce population during their first year in office. The downward revision to President Obama's workforce population stopped his participation rate from falling further than it already had fallen. The upward revisions to President Trump's population number have muted the underlying improvement in the workforce participation rate.<br /><br /><b>What is really happening? </b>The workforce participation numbers dropped for four of the five Presidents. Only Clinton had a higher participation rate after twelve months. The may have been more participation because more people were working part-time.&nbsp; The non-seasonally adjusted unemployment rate popped up to 4.49%. The unemployment rates for Presidents Reagan, Clinton. Bush and Obama were 9.43%, 7.34%, 6.32%, and 10.56% Respectively. The participation rates matter. Right now the effective unemployment rate, factoring in the missing participants as unemployed workers, means that the "real" or effective unemployment rate is well over 8%. If you compare where Presidents Reagan and Trump started President Trump is doing better than President Reagan was doing.<br /><br />The jobs market is doing well. Unemployed workers are finding full-time jobs. Part-time workers are finding full-time jobs. We have seen more full-time jobs added under President Trump than under any of his predecessors during their first twelve months in office, going back to Reagan. People with full-time jobs will spend more money at the restaurants and stores. More money in the economy means more money for business and more profits.<br /><br />It's the economy.http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/five-presidents-after-12-months-jobs.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-4122715853363123703Mon, 05 Feb 2018 17:36:00 +00002018-02-05T09:36:03.276-08:00Top Ten Article of January 2018<strong></strong>The most read articles of any given month could have been written at the beginning of the month, the end of the month, during a prior month or even a prior year. The week in review articles seem to be regular "reads" for the readers of this column. Jobs data, and information n unemployment, also tend to be favorites of the readers of this column.&nbsp; This month was not much different.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-I_KGkajFatY/WniVwPW165I/AAAAAAAAS5Q/l69GSNHh-085jHenb2OtN1yhLhBdTC_9ACLcBGAs/s1600/RoMan%2BNumeral%2BTen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="512" data-original-width="512" height="200" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-I_KGkajFatY/WniVwPW165I/AAAAAAAAS5Q/l69GSNHh-085jHenb2OtN1yhLhBdTC_9ACLcBGAs/s200/RoMan%2BNumeral%2BTen.jpg" width="200" /></a></div><strong>(Jan. 27)</strong> The most read article of the month was one of the last articles of the month that was published. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-27-week-in-review--state-of-things.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January 27 Week in Review: The State of Things</strong></a>" Started with an article on the Schumer Shutdown for Illegal Immigrants and ended with the GDP report. This article also gave some great information that he President could have used in his State of the Union Address.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan 22.)</strong> "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/schumer-shutdown-for-illegal-immigrants.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The Schumer Shutdown for Illegal Immigrants</strong></a>" was a top article itself. This article details how the DACA program started with a memo. It details some of the bills in Congress that could have helped avoid the Shutdown, such at the budget passed by the House sitting in the Senate. How about Kate's law, passed in the House, sitting in the Senate.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 9)</strong> The monthly Employment Situation Report, or Jobs Report, was released on January 5th and forgotten by January 6th. The article "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/multiple-job-workers-up-during-december.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Multiple Job Holders up during December</strong></a>" detailed how some people were working multiple jobs during December and yet there were fewer December multiple Job Holders this December than during December 2016.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 6)</strong> The <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-6-week-in-review--strong-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January 6th Week in review</strong></a> was another article that caught your attention. This week in review included the Top Ten of December Article, the Top Ten of 2017 Article, the ADP forecast article, the ADP results article, as well as the Employment situation forecast and employment situation summary article. <br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 2)</strong> This column writes forecast articles and "results" articles. It is called managing expectations. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/expect-strong-dec.-adp-report.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Expect Strong ADP Report</strong></a>" examined the changes in month to month job growth and December to December potential. It also looked at the annual jobs growth rate.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 19)</strong> We receive monthly reports on Federal Spending and Federal Debt. It is amazing that this report was released on the Friday of the Shutdown - over the Budget. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/schumer-shutdown-and-spending.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Schumer Shutdown and Spending</strong></a>" details how we are 20.6 trillion dollars in debt, how a budget was due June of 2017, how a budget was passed by the House of Representative last Summer, and how we have an on-budget deficit and an "off-budget" surplus.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 21, 2015)</strong> Sometimes it is easier to reference prior articles in a current article than reinventing the wheel. One of the most read articles this month was one written three years ago. "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-era-of-meme-which-president-created.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Era of the Meme: Which President Created More Jobs?</strong></a>" There was discussion that President Obama was the second best President in job creation - with two years left in his Presidency. Imagine what President Bush (43) would have said with two years left in his Presidency. <br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 8)</strong> A regular article on this website is the "Five Presidents at __ months" article. This series started with "Four Presidents at 81 months." It was inspired by the "Era of the Meme" article. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/five-presidents-after-eleven-months.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Five Presidents at 11 Months</strong></a>" showed how President Trump has added more workers than President Clinton, President George W. Bush, President Obama, and even President Reagan, after eleven months in office.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 13)</strong> Yet another Week in Review Article cracks the top ten for the Month of January. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-13-week-in-review--retail-record.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The January 13 Week in Review</strong></a> covered the Multiple Job Workers article, The "Five Presidents Article," the MARTS Retail article, and some seriously good unemployment claims data.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 15)</strong> The monthly Employment Situation report can be viewed many ways. How many workers entered the workforce and how many are unemployed? How many men and women are working and are they working full-time or part-time? The article "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/stronger-than-reported-dec.-sector-worker-growth.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Stronger than expected sector data</strong></a>" examined the ten private sector super sectors and the government sector worker numbers.<br /><br />You enjoy the Week in review articles and the "jobs articles." So do I.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/top-ten-article-of-january-2018.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-4577900523972768053Sat, 03 Feb 2018 13:32:00 +00002018-02-03T05:32:55.109-08:00Feb. 3 Week in Review: Jobs!<br />This week this column published a forecast article for the ADP jobs report and an article for the Employment Situation report. There was one article written regarding the January ADP jobs data and two articles, so far, on the January Employment Situation report data. Throw in a weekly unemployment claims article and call it a week.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YUbrjDf9clU/WnW44b9dbgI/AAAAAAAAS44/4Zoek5SBRdYPS-p5lC45IGXQbmNYrSRmwCLcBGAs/s1600/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YUbrjDf9clU/WnW44b9dbgI/AAAAAAAAS44/4Zoek5SBRdYPS-p5lC45IGXQbmNYrSRmwCLcBGAs/s320/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><strong>(Jan. 29)</strong> <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-adp-picture-is-cloudy.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The forecast of the ADP report</strong></a> was released Monday. It was thought that there were going to be month to month seasonally adjusted job gains in nine of the ten sectors. There was the possibility of some minor January to January declines. The most important thing was the annual growth rate.<br /><br /><strong>(Jan. 30)</strong> The big report is the Employment Situation Report. The "Jobs Report" is created by using two different data sets, the Current Employment Statistics worker data and the Current Population Survey jobs data. "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-report-forecast---seasonal-greatness.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Jan. Jobs Forecast: Seasonal Greatness</strong></a>" went into details as to how important the revisions to the prior data would be, as well as the importance of the seasonal factors used and the growth rates, especially the population growth rate. Was 200,000 jobs possible? Yup. 300,000 Jobs? Possibly. 400,000 jobs.....<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NmCfkSIHLd4/WnW5Nm2iJEI/AAAAAAAAS48/t2YenMjuPg88qDEX-BQyqRlkjZywb07-QCLcBGAs/s1600/RY%2BADP%2BPost%2BReport%2BJanuary%2B20180131.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NmCfkSIHLd4/WnW5Nm2iJEI/AAAAAAAAS48/t2YenMjuPg88qDEX-BQyqRlkjZywb07-QCLcBGAs/s640/RY%2BADP%2BPost%2BReport%2BJanuary%2B20180131.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Jan 31)</strong> Wednesday we received a "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/remarkable-jan.-adp-jobs-report.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Remarkable January ADP Jobs Report</strong></a>." There was month to month seasonally adjusted job growth in nine of ten sectors. The growth rate was better than almost any January going back to 2003. This improving growth rate caused this column to speculate that the Employment Situation report might even be better&nbsp; than originally thought.<br /><br /><strong>(Feb. 1)</strong> How low can unemployment claims go this year? <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/unemployment-claims-at-rarely-seen-levels.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Unemployment Claims, first-time and Continuing, are at levels rarely seen during January. </strong></a><br />The unemployment insurance program started during 1967 with fewer than 53 million covered insured. Right now there are over 140 million covered insured. The seasonally adjusted first-time unemployment claims was reported at 230,000. They could have been reported under 220,000 claims. Continuing claims were reported at 1.95 Million claims. They could have been reported at 1.712 million claims.<strong> </strong><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zMK2cR5FJWw/WnW5080PalI/AAAAAAAAS5E/30yf0kA7ePk5PGnPT7ZohUG0mO1IKc2SACLcBGAs/s1600/Jan%2BCES%2BCombination%2Bwith%2Bdata%2Brevision%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="348" data-original-width="619" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zMK2cR5FJWw/WnW5080PalI/AAAAAAAAS5E/30yf0kA7ePk5PGnPT7ZohUG0mO1IKc2SACLcBGAs/s1600/Jan%2BCES%2BCombination%2Bwith%2Bdata%2Brevision%2B20180202.png" /></a></div><strong>(Feb 2)</strong> The Jobs Report was so strong that it tanked the markets? Really? What would have happened if they dug into the data and found that the data for 2016 and 2017 were revised higher and that these revisions softened the data down to 196,000 seasonally adjusted workers.&nbsp; If the data from the December Jobs report were used as the basis of the "jobs number" then 452,000 jobs would have been added. It was a "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>January Jobs Surprise</strong></a>."<br /><br /><strong>(Feb. 3)</strong> The data was so massively revised that what was normally covered in one article on Jobs Report Day became two. We saw "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Seriously Strong January Jobs Data</strong></a>" details how this was one of the best Januarys since 2003. Unemployment popped higher and is still lower than January 2003 to date. It also detailed how the workforce population data was skewed high which lowered the workforce participation rate. <br /><br />The jobs report can move markets. People wanting to rebalance their portfolios can change the market. The economy is improving, no matter what the authors of the reports want to tell you.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/feb-3-week-in-review-jobs.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-7042341747581583090Sat, 03 Feb 2018 11:53:00 +00002018-02-03T03:53:21.659-08:00#JobsReportCurrent Population SurveySeriously Strong January CPS Jobs Data<br />This was a solid solid jobs. The January Jobs report included massive revisions to the Current Employment Statistics data set, as was detailed in "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-surprise.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Jan. Jobs Surprise.</strong></a>" The thought going into the report was that there might be some revision to the November and December data. There was revision to data from the past two years that were substantial. There were minor revisions to all of the data from 1981 through 2017 for the non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) and seasonally adjusted (SA) data. <a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/959438302150569989" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>If we used the data published last month, the December jobs report, and the data for January</strong></a> from this jobs report there would have been 447,000 seasonally adjusted private sector workers reported as having being added to the economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pncJassOG5w/WnWhapI6jlI/AAAAAAAAS4I/ZNW6P4yuA1colJcZFCqL9y9uaYmVJsfgACLcBGAs/s1600/Jobs%2BMountain%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pncJassOG5w/WnWhapI6jlI/AAAAAAAAS4I/ZNW6P4yuA1colJcZFCqL9y9uaYmVJsfgACLcBGAs/s640/Jobs%2BMountain%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Best January Jobs Level EVER.</strong> One year ago this column published an article that showed that we had fewer full-time jobs during January 2017 than we had during July 2007. This January we have 2.420 million more full-time jobs than last January and 99,000 fewer part-time jobs than last January. Instead of a "jobs iceberg we are seeing a jobs mountain grow before our very eyes.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ysmgJcURgyU/WnWhoQO4fvI/AAAAAAAAS4M/9HIALjpnC8AH5sjTCBxukhv4QvkmuFR0ACLcBGAs/s1600/Fewer%2BJobs%2BLost%2Bthan%2B2003-2014%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ysmgJcURgyU/WnWhoQO4fvI/AAAAAAAAS4M/9HIALjpnC8AH5sjTCBxukhv4QvkmuFR0ACLcBGAs/s640/Fewer%2BJobs%2BLost%2Bthan%2B2003-2014%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>We saw some of the lowest job cutting we have seen since 2003</strong>. This doesn't sound like good news. Losing jobs? why aren't you hearing this elsewhere. Other news sources examine the report - this site examines the data. There were fewer jobs trimmed this year than last year. There were fewer jobs trimmed this January than January 2003 -January 2013, January only. There were fewer full-time jobs trimmed than January 2003-2017.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zAhA-Vkac_s/WnWhxciEDLI/AAAAAAAAS4Q/rhBZejVx-PwKI8QKQokhsOa0kE_Ni1UbgCLcBGAs/s1600/SA%2BCPS%2BWeirdness%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zAhA-Vkac_s/WnWhxciEDLI/AAAAAAAAS4Q/rhBZejVx-PwKI8QKQokhsOa0kE_Ni1UbgCLcBGAs/s640/SA%2BCPS%2BWeirdness%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>How did we have a better month than January 2014 and have a worse month than January 2014?</strong> The NSA CPS data shows that 897,000 NSA CPS jobs were lost during January 2014 while 818,000 total jobs were lost this past month. Somehow, the seasonal factors were skewed so that over 500,000 SA CPS jobs were added during 2014&nbsp; while just over 300,000 SA CPS jobs were reported as being added this January.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6aW_xRKnX3M/WnWh9gkB6_I/AAAAAAAAS4Y/GB2cXDrsqEgXv4Ps9xjEdhTvxvDxHmgTwCLcBGAs/s1600/NSA%2BSA%2BU3%2Bsmall%2Bjump%2Bup%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6aW_xRKnX3M/WnWh9gkB6_I/AAAAAAAAS4Y/GB2cXDrsqEgXv4Ps9xjEdhTvxvDxHmgTwCLcBGAs/s640/NSA%2BSA%2BU3%2Bsmall%2Bjump%2Bup%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Unemployment popped during January - This is normal. </strong>This was the smallest pop in unemployment since 2013. The forecast article projected a sizable bump, based on a sizable bump in the continuing claims data for the week closest to the data collection week for the January Jobs Report. It was thought that the U-3 unemployment number could increase by 10-14%. It jumped by 14.51%. This was not much in the grand scheme of things. Even after this spike, <a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/959517166784712704" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>the non-seasonally adjusted U-3 unemployment level was the lowest since 2002</strong></a> and lower than 1980-1997, January only. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5p9xU1a0Ro8/WnWiLNiTdvI/AAAAAAAAS4g/oOF0wo5A6EosToP0-D_H_1thbYyqysObQCLcBGAs/s1600/Participation%2BUNempoyment%2BReversion%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5p9xU1a0Ro8/WnWiLNiTdvI/AAAAAAAAS4g/oOF0wo5A6EosToP0-D_H_1thbYyqysObQCLcBGAs/s640/Participation%2BUNempoyment%2BReversion%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The workforce Population Soared - Causing the participation rate to tick slightly lower.</strong>&nbsp; This was a concern that was raised during the jobs report forecast article. Last January the workforce population was revised down by 0.26%. That downward revision prevented President Obama from leaving office with a lower participation rate than President Jimmy Carter had during his final month in office. Boosting the workforce population caused the participation rate to fall even though the seasonally adjusted unemployment level, the seasonally adjusted full-time jobs level, and the seasonally adjusted part-time jobs level all increased from their December levels. <br /><br /><strong>If we are growing why does the CES worker revisions indicate a declining worker market? </strong>The ADP jobs report indicated that there was a 2.27% annual growth rate for the private sector, seasonally adjusted. <a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/959190555086475266" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Yesterday, on the Twitter feed, this was referenced</strong></a><strong> </strong>in a tweet where the seasonally adjusted ADP annual growth rate was compared to the seasonally adjusted CES worker growth and the non-seasonally adjusted worker growth. The data revisions to the NSA CES private sector worker data means that instead January 2017 growing at 1.68%, and December 2017 growing at 1.73%, that January 2017 grew at 1.77% and December grew at 1.82%. The upward revisions to December meant that the growth rate during January 2018 fell to 1.71% even though it was of of the best Januarys for for job change.&nbsp; We saw NSA CES workers during 2016 contract at -2.05%. We saw NSA CES workers contract by 1.96% during January 2017. Without the revisions to the data the contraction would have been at -1.86%. This would have been the second best January going back five Presidents, second only to January 1984.<br /><br />There are numerous ways to examine this data. We can look at the changes in full-time and part-time jobs. We can look at changes in the number of workers. We can look at the number of people who have to work multiple jobs. Which sectors are surging and which are still lagging behind where they were prior to the recession. How are men and women doing compared to each other? How are various age groups doing? How is President Trump doing compared to President's Reagan, Clinton, George W Bush, an Obama? All of these questions will be answered next week. The thing you need to know is that the data is fluid. Revisions make a big difference. Seasonal factors make a difference.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x9DajUmGw9Y/WnWiTTlsmOI/AAAAAAAAS4k/YLit9C6mY4EIrIqeb--JRWs6-qjIS6vMgCLcBGAs/s1600/CPS%2BCombinations%2BPermutations%2BPost-report%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="385" data-original-width="1465" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-x9DajUmGw9Y/WnWiTTlsmOI/AAAAAAAAS4k/YLit9C6mY4EIrIqeb--JRWs6-qjIS6vMgCLcBGAs/s1600/CPS%2BCombinations%2BPermutations%2BPost-report%2B20180202.png" /></a></div>http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/seriously-strong-january-cps-jobs-data.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-3630611088107870330Fri, 02 Feb 2018 16:36:00 +00002018-02-02T08:47:04.762-08:00#ActOnJobs#JobsReportCurrent Employment StatisticsJanuary Jobs SurpriseThe January Jobs report is one of the months for which seasonally adjusted data was created. We have seen non-seasonally adjusted job losses during January "forever."&nbsp; Non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) jobs, current population survey (CPS) data,&nbsp; drop during January.Non-seasonally adjusted workers, Current Employment Statistics (CES) workers drop during January. The Seasonally adjusted CES data is used for the "Headline number." Non-farm payroll includes government workers. Total Private Sector (TPS) Jobs do not include the Government Sector Jobs. The TPS data is what was used for President Obama's "Job Streak." The Jobs streak is one of the <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/economic-urban-legends.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><b>Economic Urban Legends</b></a> from the Obama Administration. What to watch in this report:<br /><ul><li>Changes to prior data. If the December SA CES data is revised up by 25,000 then that steals 25,000 from the January data.</li><li>The seasonal factor used to project the potential SA CES data was 1.01713. The seasonal factor is multiplied by the NSA CES value. A lower SF means a lower SA&nbsp; CES.</li><li>The growth rate matters. If the growth rate is better than a contraction of 2.0% (-2.0 of better, better being closer to -1.8%) then we should have reported an addition of over 200,000 jobs</li></ul><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B45vUTQQ5VY/WnSTJUGD7hI/AAAAAAAAS3s/Ay0-W_dHlvwXSa7fwLUNlFPq1FdgKObLQCLcBGAs/s1600/BEST%2BSA%2BCES%2BGrowth%2Bsince%2B1984%2Bpre-adjustement%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B45vUTQQ5VY/WnSTJUGD7hI/AAAAAAAAS3s/Ay0-W_dHlvwXSa7fwLUNlFPq1FdgKObLQCLcBGAs/s640/BEST%2BSA%2BCES%2BGrowth%2Bsince%2B1984%2Bpre-adjustement%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><b>The Non-Seasonally Adjusted CES data recorded massive revisions to the data.</b> The data for November was revised up from 125.716 million to 125.970&nbsp; million. The December data was revised up from 125.654 to 125.885 million . January's data dropped to 123.292. Without the data revisions to December the contraction would have only been 1.86%. We would have seen 452,000 private sector workers added without revising the data higher. The story does not end there. It appears that all of the non-seasonally adjusted data for the private sector number have been revised back to 1981. Th most significant changes were during 2016 and 2017<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jCuaQhnzMAc/WnSTStX3qgI/AAAAAAAAS3w/eJvxDYd0bmcDrxeUZzRGjwda2irDwKOSgCLcBGAs/s1600/Ho%2BHum%2BSA%2BCES%2Bafter%2BDec%2BRevision%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jCuaQhnzMAc/WnSTStX3qgI/AAAAAAAAS3w/eJvxDYd0bmcDrxeUZzRGjwda2irDwKOSgCLcBGAs/s640/Ho%2BHum%2BSA%2BCES%2Bafter%2BDec%2BRevision%2B20180202.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>The Seasonally Adjusted Data was revised higher, too.</b> The seasonally adjusted data was revised for November and December, too. November was revised up from 124.893 million to 125.120 million. December was revised higher from 125.039 to 125.286 million. It is not surprising that the data back to 1981 was also revised. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4BiaKCXbTkc/WnSTZSeCGpI/AAAAAAAAS30/3tFeVwpYlFQ5WvwnZNo5a6YJ6KfAyZOZwCLcBGAs/s1600/Jan%2BCES%2BCombination%2Bwith%2Bdata%2Brevision%2B20180202.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="348" data-original-width="619" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4BiaKCXbTkc/WnSTZSeCGpI/AAAAAAAAS30/3tFeVwpYlFQ5WvwnZNo5a6YJ6KfAyZOZwCLcBGAs/s1600/Jan%2BCES%2BCombination%2Bwith%2Bdata%2Brevision%2B20180202.png" /></a></div><br />There was a surprise jump in the seasonally adjusted Current Employment Statistics data from where it was reported just a month ago. The Non-seasonally adjusted CES and the Seasonally Adjusted CES data was revised all the way back to at least 1981. The data for 2016 saw the most revisions. They were better years than originally reported. Did we add 196,000 seasonally adjusted private sector jobs or over 400,000? Was this a Ho-Hum report or the best jobs report during the past 30 years? Was this Armageddon or was this winning?<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/january-jobs-surprise.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2623839998071729838Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:30:00 +00002018-02-01T07:30:27.807-08:00Continuing UnemploymentFirst Time UnemployedUnemployment Claims at Rarely Seen Levels<br />The weekly unemployment claims report hardly receives a mention in the media these days. The headline number is the seasonally adjusted (SA) First-time Unemployment (FTU)&nbsp; claims data. This number has been considered to show strength when it is under 300,000 claims a week. The second number that is of importance is the SA Continuing Claims(CC) data. These are the people who are unemployed and still receiving benefits. This week we received the first-time claims data for the fourth week of January and the continuing claims data for the third week of January. The seasonal factors that are used to convert the non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) data to the SA data change by category, week, month, season, and year. When data from different seasons are compared, or when seasonally adjusted data with different seasonal factors are compared, FACTs (False Assertions Considered to be True) are created. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/economic-urban-legends.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>One of those FACTs</strong></a> is former President Obama's "Under 300,000 First-time Claims Streak." It was easier to massage the data than change the message.&nbsp; <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/how-low-can-unemployment-claims-data-go-.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Last week we received the lowest ever non-seasonally adjusted first-time claims data for the third week of January. </strong></a>Ever, So what happened this week? Normally we see first-time claims drop from January through September with occasional upticks in the non-seasonally adjusted data. This week is one of the weeks where we should have seen a down-tick of 15-25% in the First-time claims and a slightly lower (1%-2%) continuing claims data that this past week. Could we see another 6% drop as we did last year? How low can the unemployment levels go?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BQh5EL2Og3Y/WnMxOllRiSI/AAAAAAAAS3I/4G8gWElQ7fAPNFYVe8mG1KFN29X8NkMfgCLcBGAs/s1600/NSA%2BFTU%2B1967%2Bto%2Bdate%2B20180201.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BQh5EL2Og3Y/WnMxOllRiSI/AAAAAAAAS3I/4G8gWElQ7fAPNFYVe8mG1KFN29X8NkMfgCLcBGAs/s640/NSA%2BFTU%2B1967%2Bto%2Bdate%2B20180201.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>First-time Claims edged slightly higher to 267,764.</strong> The NSA FTU edged slightly higher, in part, because the data from the past two weeks were revised lower. The Seasonally Adjusted value for January 13th was revised down to 216,000. Is a number under 200,000 within sight? It is difficult to say because the Department of Labor does not publish the future seasonal factors. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o-SpwyY_y3Q/WnMxWxPB1UI/AAAAAAAAS3M/jqSlYT95MfAfOZgYEMhCyCR-6iUQ4IDNgCLcBGAs/s1600/Fourth%2BWeek%2BJanuary%2BFTU%2BFACT%2B20180201.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="568" data-original-width="579" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-o-SpwyY_y3Q/WnMxWxPB1UI/AAAAAAAAS3M/jqSlYT95MfAfOZgYEMhCyCR-6iUQ4IDNgCLcBGAs/s1600/Fourth%2BWeek%2BJanuary%2BFTU%2BFACT%2B20180201.png" /></a></div><strong>First-time Claims could have been reported at under 219,000.</strong> The rest of the media likes to compare seasonally adjusted data with seasonally adjusted data and do not examine the seasonal factors. This was the lowest non-seasonally adjusted data this century. It was also the lowest since 1969 for this week of January. The seasonal factors are "all over the place." <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wQF4PXvTYM0/WnMxeoEpluI/AAAAAAAAS3Q/LySyoEv6uUcOG0mbH8scdeNNug7Vm_W_ACLcBGAs/s1600/NSA%2BCC%2B1967%2Bto%2Bdate%2B20180201.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wQF4PXvTYM0/WnMxeoEpluI/AAAAAAAAS3Q/LySyoEv6uUcOG0mbH8scdeNNug7Vm_W_ACLcBGAs/s640/NSA%2BCC%2B1967%2Bto%2Bdate%2B20180201.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Lowest unadjusted continuing claims for this week of January since 1971. </strong>Continuing Claims edged slightly higher from 1.940 Million to 1.953 million unadjusted claims.&nbsp; The changes that happen can be impacted by how many week s there are in a month. This month we only have four reporting weeks. Some years there are five reporting periods during January. We saw the lowest NSA CC value and the Lowest SA CC value for the third week of January since 1971.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--9uHK8AcNNY/WnMxpnDeIVI/AAAAAAAAS3U/M9-uxnf4s5QYILpSwKN-pyYULTUHZBVrwCLcBGAs/s1600/Third%2BWeek%2BJanuary%2BFTU%2BFACT%2B20180201.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="546" data-original-width="570" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--9uHK8AcNNY/WnMxpnDeIVI/AAAAAAAAS3U/M9-uxnf4s5QYILpSwKN-pyYULTUHZBVrwCLcBGAs/s1600/Third%2BWeek%2BJanuary%2BFTU%2BFACT%2B20180201.png" /></a></div><br /><strong>Continuing Claims could have been reported at 1.782 Million instead of 1.953 million claims.</strong>&nbsp; The first-time claims feed into the continuing claims data. The continuing claims data lags the first-time claims data by one week. There are 2 million fewer people receiving continuing unemployment claims than the same week of January 2002. There are over 4 million fewer people receiving claims benefits than at the depth of the recession when 6.440 million people were collecting unemployment benefits. This is seriously good news. We could be reporting continuing claims at under 1.8 million. We could be reporting continuing claims at 1.712 million claims. If we are going t compare data to seasonal data - let's compare them to seasonal data from the same year. Remember that the lowest level of "covered insured" was 53 million workers during January 1971. We have over 140 million "covered insured" right now. We&nbsp; have 425,000 fewer continuing claims than we had during 1971 and we have 87 million more potential claimants. <br /><br /><strong>This report is the Rodney Dangerfield of Economic data - It gets no respect.</strong> The weekly claims data used to be bottom of the hour headline news. If we are lucky it gets a in column mention below the fold in the daily paper. Does anybody read the paper? Most readers are reading articles posted in their Twitter feeds or Facebook feeds. This data tells us which way the economy may be heading. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/remarkable-jan.-adp-jobs-report.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Yesterday's ADP report revealed that there were upward revisions to their data for November and December</strong></a>. The annual growth rate for January 2018 was up from the annual rate during December 2017 and up from where it was during January of 2017. If the Employment situation report reveals a similar trend the Seasonally Adjusted Private Sector Worker number then<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-report-forecast---seasonal-greatness.html" target="_blank"><strong> tomorrow's headline "jobs" number should be north of 266,000 "jobs."</strong></a> It all depends on if there are similar upward revisions to the Current Employment Statistics data then the number could come in lower than 266,000. If 20,000 jobs are added to December's data that borrows 20,000 "jobs" from January. <br /><br />The unemployment level, U-3 non-seasonally adjusted, should be the lowest during the past 20 or more years. It will increase from the December level. It is called January. Watch the unemployment number. Unemployed workers are participants. The Participation rate could improve if "enough" workers count themselves as unemployed. Tomorrow's participation rate, seasonally adjusted and non-seasonally adjusted, should be better than it was during January 2017. The January Participation rate last year would have been reported lower had they not downwardly revised the workforce population. Watch the revisions to the workforce population tomorrow.&nbsp; This was a solid report. Talk about it.<br /><br />It's the economy.http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/02/unemployment-claims-at-rarely-seen.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2534093548921066777Wed, 31 Jan 2018 15:14:00 +00002018-01-31T07:14:39.862-08:00#JobsReportADPRemarkable Jan. ADP Jobs ReportThe ADP Payroll report often tells us which way the wind is blowing in advance of the monthly Employment Situation Report. The ADP report is often different from the "Jobs" report number, in part because it measures JOBS and the headline Seasonally Adjusted&nbsp; Current Employment Statistic (CES) jobs number measures WORKERS. The ADP forecast article "<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-adp-picture-is-cloudy.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Jan. ADP Picture is Cloudy</strong></a>" commented on how the annual data could point to some sectors seeing improvement while others could have seen serious drops in jobs, multiple sectors. The monthly change data saw the possibility for growth in every sector, except information technology. This column is always interested in the seasonal factors used to covert the recorded data to the reported data. This column is always interest in the adjustments to the prior data.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OoaY-pT7khc/WnHcxbKlC1I/AAAAAAAAS24/ADsH4KxdeW809CwVYvcMVOSRJaj0PwQ-QCLcBGAs/s1600/RY%2BADP%2BPost%2BReport%2BJanuary%2B20180131.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OoaY-pT7khc/WnHcxbKlC1I/AAAAAAAAS24/ADsH4KxdeW809CwVYvcMVOSRJaj0PwQ-QCLcBGAs/s640/RY%2BADP%2BPost%2BReport%2BJanuary%2B20180131.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>The November and December Data were revised higher, which took some of the luster off of this report.</strong> If last month we had 250,000 ADP jobs added and this month we had 254,000 jobs added and last month's data is revised up to 270,000 then this month we "only added" 234,000 jobs. This isn't quite what happened. The data from November was revised up 20,000 and the December data was revised up 12,000. The upward revision to the November data reduced the bounce from November to December, and the December revisions reduced the bump up from December to January. The 20,000 revision was spread out over 2 months. Without the prior revisions this report would have come in at 254,000.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sk3cD78WIl8/WnC-XAsGgxI/AAAAAAAAS2o/xIgAcNOJPnA8fV3W5CrWklC6STSGwu1AwCEwYBhgL/s1600/Janaury%2BPotential%2BSA%2BCES%2Bbased%2Bon%2BNSA%2BCES%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="208" data-original-width="570" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sk3cD78WIl8/WnC-XAsGgxI/AAAAAAAAS2o/xIgAcNOJPnA8fV3W5CrWklC6STSGwu1AwCEwYBhgL/s1600/Janaury%2BPotential%2BSA%2BCES%2Bbased%2Bon%2BNSA%2BCES%2B20180130.png" /></a></div><strong>The Unsung Story is the continuing strengthening in Four Sectors.</strong> Professional Business Services, Leisure and Hospitality, Trade, Transportation and Utilities, and "Other Services" continued to lead the way in growth rates, month to month. Education and Health Services also popped up this month. Construction, Manufacturing, and Natural Resources all grew.<br /><br /><strong>The Annual Growth rate for the entire jobs market was up from 2.23% to 2.27%.</strong> This is one of the strongest values for January since January 2003. This column has written about a "2% Tipping Point" with regard to the NSA CES data. This rolling year growth tells us where we have been. The point to upon which to reflect is that last year the rate was 1.86%, down from the 2016 rate of 2.06%. The trend is our friend. <strong><a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-jobs-report-forecast---seasonal-greatness.html" target="_blank">The SA CES growth rate for all of January 2017 was 1.68% and for December 2017 was 1.73%</a>.&nbsp; </strong>Could we see a value this Friday between 1.77% and 1.90%?<br /><br /><strong>Is a 300,000 Headline Number within reach?</strong> If we see the Current Employment Situation Annual Growth rate pop then we could see growth of well over 266,000 Seasonally Adjusted workers. A growth of 1.77% could generate a number of roughly 310,000 workers. A number of 1.87% would be comparable to 2013 and would potentially yield a number well over 400,000. It all depends on the seasonal factors used. A lower seasonal factor than projected who drop the SA CES value. Upward revisions to the prior data would reduce the bump this month. Both could happen.<br /><br />Last night was the State of the Union. It was an awesome speech. The stories of the people in attendance was moving. The economy is growing. Unemployment is down for African Americans and "Hispanics." Women are seeing their best employment rates ever. Wages are starting to improve. The media is being distracted by the speech, the Democrat responses, plural, and the "Americans are Dreamers, too" reference. Jobs are key to the continuing improvement in the economy. Construction jobs are up. More jobs mean more homes will be coming onto the market. New home sales beget other jobs. This was a solid, solid, solid report. It was remarkable. We need more people to discuss this <a href="https://www.adpemploymentreport.com/2018/January/NER/NER-January-2018.aspx" target="_blank"><b>report</b></a>.<br /><br />It's the economy.http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/remarkable-jan-adp-jobs-report.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-5536089839999174783Tue, 30 Jan 2018 19:03:00 +00002018-01-30T11:03:25.006-08:00#JobsReportCurrent Employment StatisticsCurrent Population SurveyFull-time JobsPart-time JobsParticipation RateUnemployment RateJan. Jobs Report Forecast: Seasonal Greatness<div style="text-align: center;"><strong></strong></div>Last month we received a <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/dec.-adp-jumps-250-000.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>solid ADP</strong></a> report and <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/dec.-jobs-report.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>middling Employment Situation report</strong></a>. The ADP data is seasonally adjusted and reported 250,000 jobs added. The Current Employment Statistics (CES) data is recorded as a non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) and reported as seasonally adjusted (SA) data. The seasonally adjusted data was reported at 146,000 when it could have been reported at 256,000 workers. The seasonal factors that were used to convert the NSA CES Private Sector data were lower than anticipated which lowered the reported CES data. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/jan.-adp-picture-is-cloudy.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The ADP forecast for January is for another strong report</strong></a>. The strength is based on normal month to month growth in seasonally adjusted jobs and in the total annual growth rate. A similar approach is used to project the potential growth in the CES data. The bad news is that some of you lost work last month. The good news is that they were normal seasonal losses. The good news is that this data will be seasonally adjusted a gains and that the gains may convince employers to hire more people. The Devil is in the seasonal factors.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-__eM24yIFpk/WnC9b5bufaI/AAAAAAAAS10/E4ly816PH9c-zF-72dv3eTgNIuvp7oJ2wCLcBGAs/s1600/Janaury%2Bpre-report%2BNSA%2BCES%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-__eM24yIFpk/WnC9b5bufaI/AAAAAAAAS10/E4ly816PH9c-zF-72dv3eTgNIuvp7oJ2wCLcBGAs/s640/Janaury%2Bpre-report%2BNSA%2BCES%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>The Headline Number is the Seasonally Adjusted CES Worker Number - and That may spike much higher.</strong> last January we had one of the smallest drops in the NSA CES Private Sector worker level that we had recorded during the prior decade. The normal drop is around 2.00%. Last year it only dropped 1.96%. Thankfully the headline number is a seasonally adjusted number. Whereas "every January" we lose NSA CES workers, almost every January we ad SA CES workers. Last year's NSA contraction of 1.96% was reported as a, n expansion of 0.17%. The worst January SA data was reported during January of&nbsp; 2008, 2009, and 2010. We saw virtually no change in the SA CES data during January 2008 and January 2010.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GE8tld_7hJ8/WnC9kP-gwsI/AAAAAAAAS14/86gIxvuet3En3x-I3PntTJRdczpzJPrgwCLcBGAs/s1600/JAnuary%2BCES%2BShotgun%2BSF%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1161" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GE8tld_7hJ8/WnC9kP-gwsI/AAAAAAAAS14/86gIxvuet3En3x-I3PntTJRdczpzJPrgwCLcBGAs/s640/JAnuary%2BCES%2BShotgun%2BSF%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>The seasonal factors are all over the place - that is an economic&nbsp; technical term.</strong> If you look at the <a href="https://twitter.com/Anxie_TEA/status/958371464184557569" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>seasonal factors</strong></a> used to convert the NSA CES data to the SA CES&nbsp; data it appears that someone threw a data at the wall and took one step over each year. Some months there is a steady pattern up or down. January is not one of those months. The seasonal factor last year was high - trying to boost the final jobs number for President Obama. This is going to be President Trump's final jobs report for his first year because the collection date is January 12th and the inauguration was January 20th. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-d-c9Krk_W3U/WnC9roLCS_I/AAAAAAAAS18/44yVlgt0l9AkEVqRpEujwdVqaV0HgERXwCLcBGAs/s1600/SA%2BCES%2Bcombinations.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="348" data-original-width="619" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-d-c9Krk_W3U/WnC9roLCS_I/AAAAAAAAS18/44yVlgt0l9AkEVqRpEujwdVqaV0HgERXwCLcBGAs/s1600/SA%2BCES%2Bcombinations.png" /></a></div><strong>Growth, seasonal factors, and adjustments make a difference.</strong> We already know that the growth is actually a contraction that is seasonally adjusted. If we see a similar rate of change as last year, and a similar seasonal factor, then we could add over 300,000 private sector workers. I am not anticipating as favorable a seasonal factor. If we grow as we did during 2014 or 2015 and use the 2014 seasonal factor then add 232,000 to 264,000 private sector workers. If we see 25,000 workers added to last month's official value that would "borrow 25,000" workers from this month's data. Instead of a solid 232,000 to 264,000 that reported value could be 207,000 to 239,000. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jxlysifXR1Y/WnC91Ac1B0I/AAAAAAAAS2A/qd_TxWvfNPQdq-Y-XLUC3szB-pYX_T5BwCLcBGAs/s1600/NSA%2BCES%2BRY%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-jxlysifXR1Y/WnC91Ac1B0I/AAAAAAAAS2A/qd_TxWvfNPQdq-Y-XLUC3szB-pYX_T5BwCLcBGAs/s640/NSA%2BCES%2BRY%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><b>The Annual Growth rate could be over 1.8%. </b>The first number calculated was done using December to January growth.If we look at the annual growth rate, where we have been, December 2017 was 1.73% compared to January 2017 at 1.68%. If we "just" grow at the same rate as this past December we will see 204,000 workers added. If we grow at December's annual rate of 1.73% we will see 266,000 seasonally adjusted workers added. If we grow at the rate we did during January of 1996, 1.81%, then we should see 364,000 workers added If we grow at the rate we were during January of 2014, 1.87% we should see 446,000 workers added. We should see those numbers, based in the 2014 seasonal factor.&nbsp; The question is how low will the seasonal factor go? How high will the revisions to the December data be? We will not hit the level seen during 2012, 2014, or 2015. That would be a gear stripping jump in annual growth. Expect a number over 250,000 and most likely around 265,000 seasonally adjusted private sector workers added.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sk3cD78WIl8/WnC-XAsGgxI/AAAAAAAAS2M/VD46fQ2taak4MEWcMIimHVbsbkXX3DPbQCLcBGAs/s1600/Janaury%2BPotential%2BSA%2BCES%2Bbased%2Bon%2BNSA%2BCES%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="208" data-original-width="570" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sk3cD78WIl8/WnC-XAsGgxI/AAAAAAAAS2M/VD46fQ2taak4MEWcMIimHVbsbkXX3DPbQCLcBGAs/s1600/Janaury%2BPotential%2BSA%2BCES%2Bbased%2Bon%2BNSA%2BCES%2B20180130.png" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong>The rest of the story (data) comes from the Current Population Survey Data</strong></div><br />The CES data is the headline data for "jobs" even though it measures workers.The true jobs number is derived from the Current Population Survey data, or household data. This data measures the quantity of full-time jobs, part-time jobs, unemployed workers, and workforce population. This data is then used to calculate the unemployment rate and the participation rate. Participation matters. If you are not officially unemployed and you are not officially employed you are a missing participant. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5py-9mj43bo/WnC9_UsRrwI/AAAAAAAAS2E/Dx3W2yoi_wkoIBGcK-hF1ZqnsiNRrmvxQCEwYBhgL/s1600/January%2BNSA%2BCPS%2Bpre-report%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5py-9mj43bo/WnC9_UsRrwI/AAAAAAAAS2E/Dx3W2yoi_wkoIBGcK-hF1ZqnsiNRrmvxQCEwYBhgL/s640/January%2BNSA%2BCPS%2Bpre-report%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>January normally means that non-seasonally adjusted jobs drop.</strong> The only time that we did not see both full-time and part-time jobs drop during January was January of 2012 - probably people finding work in either the Obama campaign or the Romney Campaign. Will we see minor drops in jobs as we did during 2013, 2014, 2015 or will we see jobs fade as they did during 2006 or January 2010?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BBPaTIhi-Ak/WnC-gUF3-oI/AAAAAAAAS2U/6f6yXwlF-_Ai2SVO-KiJnbEQ8-O_FJZzwCLcBGAs/s1600/Pre-report%2BCPS%2BSA%2BJanuary%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BBPaTIhi-Ak/WnC-gUF3-oI/AAAAAAAAS2U/6f6yXwlF-_Ai2SVO-KiJnbEQ8-O_FJZzwCLcBGAs/s640/Pre-report%2BCPS%2BSA%2BJanuary%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Normally we see seasonally adjusted jobs improve during January.</strong> It would be great for real workers if these jobs were real jobs instead of seasonally adjusted jobs. This number is rarely ever mentioned. What would the stock market do if it was reported that we added half a million SA CPS jobs as we did during January of 2016. They would either laugh or party like it was 1999.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--kRRWr5_Ypc/WnC-oTqkOlI/AAAAAAAAS2Y/ngFUhRN1dFwoh4nhfzQB3PiehqJu016FQCLcBGAs/s1600/NSA%2BSA%2BU3%2BPre-report%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--kRRWr5_Ypc/WnC-oTqkOlI/AAAAAAAAS2Y/ngFUhRN1dFwoh4nhfzQB3PiehqJu016FQCLcBGAs/s640/NSA%2BSA%2BU3%2BPre-report%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>We should see non-seasonally adjusted and seasonally adjusted unemployment levels increase - This is called January.</strong>&nbsp; We have already seen the Mid-January continuing claims data pop higher. <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/unloved-unemployment-claims-data.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>It was also lower than it was during January of 2017</strong></a>. The continuing claims data is 100,000 claims lower than the same week of January 2017. The covered insured is only a fraction of the total unemployment picture. The official U-3 unemployment level. The unemployment level could pop up by a factor of four or more than the continuing claims data. Could the U-3 unemployment number jump "only 650,000" or less? It is possible . If the NSA unemployment level doesn't jump "enough" the seasonally adjusted U-3 value may negate some or all of the SA CPS growth. How will this be reported? If the seasonally adjusted jobs number increases and the seasonally adjusted unemployment level increases then the participation rate should increase, contingent upon the change in the population. Last year's downward revision to the population allowed the participation rate to rise instead of fall.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lKt7PWlOyxE/WnC-yxQTLnI/AAAAAAAAS2c/w6FxZXzjizgH0egAffDKcRzsXuZ24jBXgCLcBGAs/s1600/Participation%2BUnemployment%2BReversion%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lKt7PWlOyxE/WnC-yxQTLnI/AAAAAAAAS2c/w6FxZXzjizgH0egAffDKcRzsXuZ24jBXgCLcBGAs/s640/Participation%2BUnemployment%2BReversion%2B20180130.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>Participation Matters.</strong> The non-seasonally adjusted participation rate has been rising. The problem is that it was declining from 65.87% during January 2007 to 62.34% during January 2016, and it could have been recorded lower last year. The workforce population is revised during January. It can be revised higher, lowering the participation rate, or it can be lowered, thus raising the participation rate. The participation rate, NSA, normally bottoms during January. Currently the NSA participation rate is 62.69% This is well above the 62.45% rate during January 2017. The NSA rate could fall, especially if the number of unemployed workers doesn't spike and especially if the jobs numbers fall by a "normal" amount. Last year was a good year. This year could be even a better year. The seasonal factors are all over the place. Seasonal factors for the three components of participation cloud the picture. Non-seasonally adjusted participation should bump higher. Seasonally adjusted participation could bump higher. <br /><br />The jobs article will discuss the U-7 unemployment rate that includes the non-participants and "effectively unemployed." The U-7 value has been dropping as more people rejoin the workforce.&nbsp; There will also be articles on how the multiple job holder data changes, the sector data, data for men and women and by age group.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7c2tk0lkEDE/WnC-9Y6ayBI/AAAAAAAAS2g/o0GqxpVE__EnJd2ZhoffIShj_yVRnPEnwCLcBGAs/s1600/CPS%2BCombinations%2BPermutations%2B20180130.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="385" data-original-width="1465" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7c2tk0lkEDE/WnC-9Y6ayBI/AAAAAAAAS2g/o0GqxpVE__EnJd2ZhoffIShj_yVRnPEnwCLcBGAs/s1600/CPS%2BCombinations%2BPermutations%2B20180130.png" /></a></div>http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/jan-jobs-report-forecast-seasonal.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-6648334185132794226Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:03:00 +00002018-01-29T09:03:45.141-08:00#JobsReportADP ForecastJan. ADP Picture is CloudyThis week is jobs week and the week of the State of the Union. Tuesday is the State of the Union address by President Trump. Wednesday is the ADP Jobs Report release day. Thursday we receive the weekly unemployment claims data. Friday we receive the Employment Situation Report, also known as the Jobs Report. It is important to note that we will see a bump up in the Unemployment rate and a most likely a drop in the participation rate because of end of the year closings of businesses and the end of the seasonal work.<a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/january-jobs.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong> Last January</strong></a> we saw a smaller drop in non-seasonally adjusted workers (Current Employment Statistics) and a smaller drop in non-seasonally adjusted jobs (Current Population Survey) than expected. The seasonal factors were skewed high. This means that a net loss in workers was reported as a net gain, and a bigger gain than would have been reported during January 2016. The ADP payroll report should give us an idea as to which way the economic winds are blowing. The ADP number is only available as a seasonally adjusted number. What can we expect?<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dX4rCCQByTk/Wm9TR43W3BI/AAAAAAAAS1k/wJuCLi7F49kFQXE7oOwEhps4FRcX-852ACLcBGAs/s1600/Crowd%2BPicture%2BStock%2BADP%2Bimpage.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="347" data-original-width="480" height="231" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dX4rCCQByTk/Wm9TR43W3BI/AAAAAAAAS1k/wJuCLi7F49kFQXE7oOwEhps4FRcX-852ACLcBGAs/s320/Crowd%2BPicture%2BStock%2BADP%2Bimpage.png" width="320" /></a></div><br /><strong>The January to January data indicates that we could see surges in the Education and Health Services and the Trade, Transportation, Utilities sectors.</strong> These two sectors have been dominant during the recovery. It is possible that we see net, year to year, January losses in Natural Resource (Mining and Logging,) Leisure and Hospitality, Professional and Business Services, and "Other Services." The growth appear to be a strong 200,000 jobs added, with a possibility of 225,000 jobs added. The annual ADP Growth rate was 2.23% during December. If we grow at 2.23% it will be a blow-out number If we grow as we did during January 2014 (2.04) or January 2016 (2.07%) then we will see 240,000 to 270,000.<br /><br /><strong>The Month to month data indicates that we should see jobs added in every sector except Information and Technology.</strong>&nbsp; The month to month data compares well with what we have been experiencing&nbsp; on a regular basis. This was the strongest first year worker gains for any President since and including President Reagan, <a href="http://www.itstheeconomy.info/five-presidents-after-eleven-months.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>after eleven months</strong></a>. The trend is your friend. The trend for seasonally adjusted month to month growth falls in the range of 250,000 to 270,000. If you look at the month to month growth, as a whole, the data indicates 190,000 to 270,000 jobs will be added. <br /><br />Net-Net there is a black box box scenario. If we look at the annual changes we could see some sectors surge and some sectors drop during January. If we look at the annual changes and annual growth we could see a strong jobs number or&nbsp; a serious jump - remarkable, in fact. We could see month to month growth in virtually every sector. Is it sunny or is it cloudy? We will lose non-seasonally adjusted CES workers and we will lose non-seasonally adjusted CPS jobs.&nbsp; This is "why" the data is seasonally adjusted. There would be not streaks in employment if the data wasn't seasonally adjusted.&nbsp; The ADP could be a barn-burner of a report with 250,000 or more seasonally adjusted jobs added. Is a 300,000 number possible? Yes. It depends on the number of people working two jobs. Jobs could jump and workers might not grow as much because people are working multiple jobs. It depends in the revisions to the prior data. It depends on the seasonal factors used. The ADP data does not have a published non-seasonally adjusted component. It is a black box. If the prior data is revised higher by 25,000 jobs then this month will be reported lower by 25,000. Expect good news.<br /><br />It's the economy.<br /><br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/jan-adp-picture-is-cloudy.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5608377221188888333.post-2887132738462634459Sat, 27 Jan 2018 13:54:00 +00002018-01-27T05:54:30.711-08:00#illegalimmigration#SchumerShutdownAnnualized GDPContinuing UnemploymentExisting Home SalesFirst Time UnemployedNew Home SalesReal GDPJan. 27 Week in Review: State of Things<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4BR5Tk1d2ME/WmyEKxLXPXI/AAAAAAAAS1U/B3ByapR7310jWiVEnIOxwqmBV5p4SnM8QCLcBGAs/s1600/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4BR5Tk1d2ME/WmyEKxLXPXI/AAAAAAAAS1U/B3ByapR7310jWiVEnIOxwqmBV5p4SnM8QCLcBGAs/s320/My%2BTwo%2BCents.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>This week was a great week for finishing the data collection and dissemination for the State of the Union Speech that is coming up this week. We received information regarding new home sales and existing home sales. We received information on a historically low level of unemployment benefits. We also received solid Gross Domestic Product (GDP) information.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-HQ9XNPU_39U/Wmx9EXUXk6I/AAAAAAAAS0Y/SNdmdjIUoSo_HNPlBAWV-xG7pjG6m2BHQCLcBGAs/s1600/Immigration%2BMemo%2Bdoenloaded%2B20180122.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="651" data-original-width="497" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-HQ9XNPU_39U/Wmx9EXUXk6I/AAAAAAAAS0Y/SNdmdjIUoSo_HNPlBAWV-xG7pjG6m2BHQCLcBGAs/s640/Immigration%2BMemo%2Bdoenloaded%2B20180122.png" width="488" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Jan. 22)</strong> The week started with s shutdown, the <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/schumer-shutdown-for-illegal-immigrants.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Schumer Shutdown for Illegal Immigrants</strong></a>. The first article of the week details how this problem was created by a memo during the run-up to the Presidential Election of 2012, what is being done regarding Visa Overstays and Kate's Law, and what the costs of inaction are. <br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_TJPlUk7zy4/Wmx9QvsQ2VI/AAAAAAAAS0c/jq4-7AdrIRMIAo92-S04aJOyZCSoiAC7gCLcBGAs/s1600/Existing%2BHome%2BASP%2BUnits%2BPost-Report%2B20180124.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_TJPlUk7zy4/Wmx9QvsQ2VI/AAAAAAAAS0c/jq4-7AdrIRMIAo92-S04aJOyZCSoiAC7gCLcBGAs/s640/Existing%2BHome%2BASP%2BUnits%2BPost-Report%2B20180124.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Jan. 24)</strong> We received some remarkable data regarding existing home sales. WE saw a record average sales price for the month of December. We also saw a level of inventory lower than anything on record back to January 1999. It was "<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/remarkably-high-average-sales-price.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>Remarkable December Existing Home Sales Data.</strong></a>" There was a lot to discuss.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-d5THH1acH94/Wmx9Zdj-PjI/AAAAAAAAS0g/qhbYslZU3Uk3YfKCALZJ508oIDohDneSQCLcBGAs/s1600/NSA%2BFTU%2B1967%2Bto%2Bdate%2B20180125.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-d5THH1acH94/Wmx9Zdj-PjI/AAAAAAAAS0g/qhbYslZU3Uk3YfKCALZJ508oIDohDneSQCLcBGAs/s640/NSA%2BFTU%2B1967%2Bto%2Bdate%2B20180125.png" width="640" /></a></div><strong>(Jan. 24)</strong><strong></strong> Thursday was a busy morning with the release of the weekly unemployment claims data and the Monthly New Home Sales data. <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/how-low-can-unemployment-claims-data-go.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>We saw the lowest EVER non-seasonally adjusted first-time claims number for the third week of January. </strong></a>The program started during 1967. The lowest&nbsp; during the past 51 years. First-time claims tend to drop from here through the end of Summer. The continuing claims data is on the decline as well.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--uMtFgtZjx8/Wmx9iIZH8XI/AAAAAAAAS0k/jmY4tvk-mugjJJIj0wVVFPiqcdTCUT8sgCLcBGAs/s1600/New%2BHome%2BSales%2BDecember%2B20180125.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1162" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/--uMtFgtZjx8/Wmx9iIZH8XI/AAAAAAAAS0k/jmY4tvk-mugjJJIj0wVVFPiqcdTCUT8sgCLcBGAs/s640/New%2BHome%2BSales%2BDecember%2B20180125.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Jan. 25)&nbsp;</strong> The new home sales data was also remarkable. <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/dec-new-home-sales-misunderstood.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The new homes sales were misunderstood.</strong></a> We have a new home inventory problem just as we have an existing home inventory problem. Inventory is rising for new home sales. We set a December record for the average sales price as it approached $400,000. We had our best year since 2007. It is also remarkable that the media mostly ignored the data as being "unimpressive." December was up 10% over December 2016. The entire year was up 8% over the 2016 level of sales. That deserves some remarks.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XnmRATrUBnI/Wmx9rJYMYPI/AAAAAAAAS0s/YjnnNuMlucAQ9nWYA6Zq3rzRDnyUMGJjACLcBGAs/s1600/Real%2BGDP%2BTable%2B8%2B2017q4a%2B20180126.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1163" data-original-width="1600" height="464" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XnmRATrUBnI/Wmx9rJYMYPI/AAAAAAAAS0s/YjnnNuMlucAQ9nWYA6Zq3rzRDnyUMGJjACLcBGAs/s640/Real%2BGDP%2BTable%2B8%2B2017q4a%2B20180126.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><strong>(Jan. 26)</strong> What is up with the Gross Domestic Product? The Real GDP, the value that tells us where we have been during the past 12 months was up for the sixth consecutive quarter. <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/solid-fourth-quarter-gdp-26.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>The Annualized GDP, the headline GDP, came in at 2.6%</strong></a>. This is pretty good when you consider that there were two quarters of growth over 3% preceding it. The times where we have had a fourth quarter over 3% it was because the GDP was bouncing up from a value of 1.3% (2009,) or 0.8% (2011,) or 0.1% (2006) during the third quarter. It was significant because we saw Personal Consumption Expenditures rise (although not as much as it could have been reported,) Gross Private Domestic Investments rose, Exports rose, and Government Expenditures rose. <br /><br />This was an outstanding month for economic data. There is a considerable amount of good news for the State of the Union. President Trump has added more private sectors workers during his<a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/five-presidents-after-eleven-months.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong> first eleven months</strong></a> in office than Presidents Reagan, Clinton, George W. Bush, or Obama. <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/record-annual-retail-sales-this-is-big.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>We had our best retail Sales Year EVER</strong></a>. We also saw that <a href="https://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/starts-up-8-from-2016.html" style="color: #0000ee;" target="_blank"><strong>New Construction</strong></a> Starts, units under construction, and completions are up from 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. New construction generates other economic activity through the creation of jobs and retail sales. It is a virtuous cycle. The stock market is soaring. <br /><br /><b>The President Should quote President Clinton's 1995 State of the Union Address.</b> "All Americans, not only in the states most heavily affected, but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens."<br /><br /><b>The President should quote Senator Obama:</b> "When Congress last addressed this issue comprehensively in 1986, there were approximately 4 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. That number had grown substantially when Congress again addressed the issue in 1996. Today, it is estimated that there are more than 11 million undocumented aliens living in our country.<br /><br />The American people are a welcoming and generous people. But those who enter our country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law. And because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Americans are right to demand better border security and better enforcement of the immigration laws."<br /><br /><b>The President should quote President Teddy Roosevelt.</b> "In&nbsp;the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."<br /><br />The President could also reference Senator Schumer, Senator Clinton, and Senator Feinstein from a time when they were against illegal immigration before they were for it. The same could be said regarding Congresswoman Pelosi.&nbsp; Use these peoples' words against them. <br /><br />It's the Economy.<br /><br /><br /><br />http://anxietea2016.blogspot.com/2018/01/jan-27-week-in-review-state-of-things.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Jack Dunn)0